148 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaiser Shepard]

The same, in a way, applies to curing the genophage.

[Jaron Oberyn]

Kronner wrote...

Not gonna happen, in ME2 the queen leaves you a message saying she will help against the Reapers. It is stupid to kill the queen without knowing anything at all about her.

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Think of
it this way: the Rachni Queen got the notion of the Reapers and the
indoctrination from its interaction with Benezia (who was
indoctrinated). Putting 2 and 2 together yeilds a perfect lie: "Shep,
it's all Reapers' fault, and we are white and fluffy!".

Too bad
Legion indirectly confirmes the Queen's story. Because if the Queen's
story is true, there is a huge PLOTHOLE there. Namely, if Sovereign
indoctrinated the Rachni two thousand years ago, it would know the
location of the Mu Relay!

Anyway, the Youtube vid of the Rachni
"Envoy" dialogue gave me creeps. What the Rachni do to humanoids isn't
any better than indoctrination itself.

lol yeah, because Sovereign is the only Reaper that could have enslave the Rachni, for all you know Rachni could have been indoctrinated long before Sovereign was found by Saren.

Where did you read/hear that the rachni was indoctrinated? I thought they were threatened into starting the war. Isn't that what was said in ME1 and ME2?

 -Polite

[lltoon]

Well if the Rachni ever betray me I still have the cure for the genophage. I'll just Krogan-stomp them back to oblivion again.

[Chuvvy]

Ah hahahahaha. No. Because of those paragon points nothing bad will happen. It would be cool but it won't happen.

[NICKjnp]

Here we go again... "lets punish the paragon for being good because I want to be bad"... that is pointless logic. There will be benefits to paragons and renegades in ME3. Why do you always want paragons to have bad stuff happen to them? Having the Rachni turn on Shepard would feel a bit forced. I would rather have smaller the smaller decisions have negative outcomes in ME3.... but not the really big ones. That would make me dislike the game.

[Soverign 666]

NICKjnp wrote...

Here we go again... "lets punish the paragon for being good because I want to be bad"... that is pointless logic. There will be benefits to paragons and renegades in ME3. Why do you always want paragons to have bad stuff happen to them? Having the Rachni turn on Shepard would feel a bit forced. I would rather have smaller the smaller decisions have negative outcomes in ME3.... but not the really big ones. That would make me dislike the game.

I don't want this to happen just because I like being renegade (i have played the game both ways about equally), but in real life the "good" descision dosen't always work out it would add a bit of realism if someone that shepard helped ended up stabbing them in the back.

[Tooneyman]

NICKjnp wrote...

Here we go again... "lets punish the paragon for being good because I want to be bad"... that is pointless logic. There will be benefits to paragons and renegades in ME3. Why do you always want paragons to have bad stuff happen to them? Having the Rachni turn on Shepard would feel a bit forced. I would rather have smaller the smaller decisions have negative outcomes in ME3.... but not the really big ones. That would make me dislike the game.

Noo, no hold up. It would all depend on how it is handle. I don't think Bioware would just ruin your game experience and force something like that on you. I was saying something on a smaller level. Say a few Rachni get indoctrinated from the queen and they become enemies. This would punish the paragon just a little, but at the same time it would give you a reason to go talk to the queen to see if she is indoctrinated or even save her. Good mission and it has some concequence to it. Just you would only find out a few of her children forgot her song like in the lab on noveria and she tells you to go and kill them like you did in the lab. This would be very good.

[Tooneyman]

Soverign 666 wrote...

NICKjnp wrote...

Here we go again... "lets punish the paragon for being good because I want to be bad"... that is pointless logic. There will be benefits to paragons and renegades in ME3. Why do you always want paragons to have bad stuff happen to them? Having the Rachni turn on Shepard would feel a bit forced. I would rather have smaller the smaller decisions have negative outcomes in ME3.... but not the really big ones. That would make me dislike the game.

I don't want this to happen just because I like being renegade (i have played the game both ways about equally), but in real life the "good" descision dosen't always work out it would add a bit of realism if someone that shepard helped ended up stabbing them in the back.

We have liara for that. I already see her doing this!

[mosor]

NICKjnp wrote...

Here we go again... "lets punish the paragon for being good because I want to be bad"... that is pointless logic. There will be benefits to paragons and renegades in ME3. Why do you always want paragons to have bad stuff happen to them? Having the Rachni turn on Shepard would feel a bit forced. I would rather have smaller the smaller decisions have negative outcomes in ME3.... but not the really big ones. That would make me dislike the game.

You're missing the point.

First Renegade doesn't not always equal being bad or evil. Other than a few that border outright evil, most are pragmatic.

Second Being paragon, while trying to be an example to others or good hearted, there are a few decisions that can be outiright naive.

Yes playing both renegade and paragon strictly should lead to a decent conclusion to the series. However there should be some fallout playing strictly one way or another. I don't know why thats such a bad thing. In real life plenty of naive good intentions have come back to haunt people.

[NICKjnp]

Maybe because the game isn't real life? Punishing people for acting nice won't win over any more fans to bioware games. It would ****** me off for sure.

[Kaiser Shepard]

So choices having actual consequences are bad now and would ruin the game?



If this is the fanbase BioWare is trying to cater to, no wonder they came up with something as ridiculous as forcing the previous game's bad ending as the canon upon the player with Dragon Age: Awakening.

[ObserverStatus]

If the Rachni betray you in ME3 I'm sure it won't be too big of a problem, you shoot a nuke down a bug hole and you've got a lot of dead bugs.

[NICKjnp]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

So choices having actual consequences are bad now and would ruin the game?

If this is the fanbase BioWare is trying to cater to, no wonder they came up with something as ridiculous as forcing the previous game's bad ending as the canon upon the player with Dragon Age: Awakening.

No... forcing players to regret making a decision is a bad thing.  This isn't like... I want so and so character.  Making a bad decision happen from a good choice just makes me, and others, angry at the game.  I think both paragon and renegade decisions should play out well.  People seem to want all the paragon decisions to backfire because letting the council die in the first game backfired on them in the second game.... even if you play all renegade in the second game and you gain the power to keep humanity stronger than the other races.

[tonnactus]

mosor wrote...

Yes playing both renegade and paragon strictly should lead to a decent conclusion to the series. However there should be some fallout playing strictly one way or another. I don't know why thats such a bad thing. In real life plenty of naive good intentions have come back to haunt people.

As long as it balanced... Just imagine the reapers would attack the human race first in the Mass Effect 3.And other races refuse to help them until all the fleet of the humans is completely destroyed because shepardt didnt save the council in the first game and the next council was all human. And this way,renegade way lead to the dead of billions of humans and the lost of the power humanity gained after destroying the souvereign.

Would this be okay for you?

[Docbrown777]

Count me in as someone that would like to see a few Paragon choices come back and bite you in the rear. In fact I was kind of worried that we didn't really see that in ME2 already.



I want it to be as realistic as possible. Doing the nice guy moral thing doesn't always pan out and sometimes doing the tougher and harsher choice is the correct one. It happens in real life all the time.



I worry the series is kind of trying to make the paragon choices seem as the always correct choice. It shouldn't be that easy. You shouldn't be able to say, "this is definitely is always the correct choice." There needs to be more "Oh crud, this is a tough choice. I don't know which one to make" moments.



Personally I don't think there should have even been a Paragon/Renegad meter in the game and no blue or red text options. It should have been a lot more open and ambiguous. That's just me, I still love the game though.

[Docbrown777]

double post

Modifié par Docbrown777, 05 juillet 2010 - 08:42 .

[N7Recon]

Something should go sideways for Paragons.



I have both Paragon & Renegade Shepards and so far playing as a Paragon is nothing but benefits. Playing as a Renegade is only good for the moment - a funny line, or a dramatic sequence. Hopefully this gets fixed in ME3.



I also agree with the idea that saving the colonists on Feros being a disaster would be a better twist than "oh no, the big insects have gone bad!"

[Zulu_DFA]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Kronner wrote...

Not gonna happen, in ME2 the queen leaves you a message saying she will help against the Reapers. It is stupid to kill the queen without knowing anything at all about her.

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Think of
it this way: the Rachni Queen got the notion of the Reapers and the
indoctrination from its interaction with Benezia (who was
indoctrinated). Putting 2 and 2 together yeilds a perfect lie: "Shep,
it's all Reapers' fault, and we are white and fluffy!".

Too bad
Legion indirectly confirmes the Queen's story. Because if the Queen's
story is true, there is a huge PLOTHOLE there. Namely, if Sovereign
indoctrinated the Rachni two thousand years ago, it would know the
location of the Mu Relay!

Anyway, the Youtube vid of the Rachni
"Envoy" dialogue gave me creeps. What the Rachni do to humanoids isn't
any better than indoctrination itself.

lol yeah, because Sovereign is the only Reaper that could have enslave the Rachni, for all you know Rachni could have been indoctrinated long before Sovereign was found by Saren.

Where did you read/hear that the rachni was indoctrinated? I thought they were threatened into starting the war. Isn't that what was said in ME1 and ME2?

 -Polite

It was some moot color-music talk of the Rachni Queen during the tank scene in ME1, that gave bug-lovers the ideas. In "2" the Queen, if alive, sends an "envoy" to reaffirm this "it's all the Reapers' fault" notion. Legion indirectly confirms the story by saying that the Geth were not the first race Sovereign approached while seekin out the allies. But Legion does not specify the species indoctrinated before.

Personally I believe the childish machine way more than the necromantic bug. And I suspect it might have been the Krogans who were indoctrinated (not the whole race but some of their warlords, who started the Rebellions). This is supported by Harbinger's remark about Grunt: "A krogan - wasted potential".

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 05 juillet 2010 - 09:14 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

NICKjnp wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

So choices having actual consequences are bad now and would ruin the game?

If this is the fanbase BioWare is trying to cater to, no wonder they came up with something as ridiculous as forcing the previous game's bad ending as the canon upon the player with Dragon Age: Awakening.

No... forcing players to regret making a decision is a bad thing.  This isn't like... I want so and so character.  Making a bad decision happen from a good choice just makes me, and others, angry at the game.  I think both paragon and renegade decisions should play out well.  People seem to want all the paragon decisions to backfire because letting the council die in the first game backfired on them in the second game.... even if you play all renegade in the second game and you gain the power to keep humanity stronger than the other races.

It isn't a fairy tale, dear, we have a galaxy with murder, war, drug abuse... Space Cthulhu's liquefying people in order to 'procreate'. What's wrong with a few of your decisions blasting up in your face? Just because the choice is labled as 'Paragon' nothing should be able to go wrong? Have you already forgotten about the asari merc initiate in Samara's recruitment mission, where the Paragon option simply lets a cold-blooded murderer go?

Have you never tried to do the good thing in real life, only to be blamed for somehow doing it wrong afterwards?

I'm not saying there aren't any Renegade choices, such as keeping the Collector Base, that shouldn't backfire. Just the dumb and ungrounded ones on both sides. If you're a complete Renegade, though, there won't be nearly as much to backfire because you're basically leaving a path of corpses and explosions behind you. That in itself could "backfire" in the sense that you may not have enough allies to defeat the Reapers, but you'd never know.

As for me, I look at most things from a "better safe than sorry" perspective, which means I'd gladly sacrifice a handful of people to stop a terrorist capable of a colony drop, easily kill a few mercs pre-battle to have an easier time (and to look awesome) and with no doubt kill the last 'sapient' member of a race, because I have no reason to trust her, but also that won't give something so dangerous as the Collector Base to someone as manipulative as the Illusive Man.

Feros is my only exception, where i simply save the people because I can and let Shiala go because she seems trustworthy (the latter also being a case of honor, but whatever). However, I fully hope (yet do not want) for this screw me over later on, with the Thorian living on through my favorite asari and useing her and her people as it's pawns.

The Genophage decision on Tuchanka is the only one I still not have a reached a concensus on, though.

Also, how did letting the Council die (or in most cases, focusing on Sovereign) backfire?

[NICKjnp]

Really? Because I thought it was video game... I pay for an adventure. Not someone telling me doing the right thing is the wrong choice.

[Tooneyman]

NICKjnp wrote...

Really? Because I thought it was video game... I pay for an adventure. Not someone telling me doing the right thing is the wrong choice.

You paid for an experience. You paid for a game to have fun with and Bioware gave you that. They also told you there were going to be concequences to all your actions whether good or bad. They also said if you were watching and reading interviews there are no right or wrong choices. The ME universe is looked at as a grey universe. Just with every action you make their is a concequence. IF you have been paying attention in the first game whether you saved the council or not you still got screwed in the second game. Sorry to say my point is made!

[adneate]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Also, how did letting the Council die (or in most cases, focusing on Sovereign) backfire?

People say it backfired because it increases tensions between The Alliance and The Hierarchy, as the Turians claim they are going to ignore the dreadnought limitations treaty. However this point is moot since The Alliance is way stronger than the Turians and have a massive headstart in terms of naval forces. Whereas in the Paragon ending they cooperate to create a united peacekeeping force, but the Turians are still dominate over the humans but peace mean better for some people.

As for the Genophage I leave it be, the future of the Krogan is Urdnot Wrex's plan to unify them as a people. Curing the Genophage is pointless since they Korgan are the same tribal savages they were before, but if Wrex molds them into one people they can start becoming useful members of society.

[Tooneyman]

adneate wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Also, how did letting the Council die (or in most cases, focusing on Sovereign) backfire?

People say it backfired because it increases tensions between The Alliance and The Hierarchy, as the Turians claim they are going to ignore the dreadnought limitations treaty. However this point is moot since The Alliance is way stronger than the Turians and have a massive headstart in terms of naval forces. Whereas in the Paragon ending they cooperate to create a united peacekeeping force, but the Turians are still dominate over the humans but peace mean better for some people.

As for the Genophage I leave it be, the future of the Krogan is Urdnot Wrex's plan to unify them as a people. Curing the Genophage is pointless since they Korgan are the same tribal savages they were before, but if Wrex molds them into one people they can start becoming useful members of society.

Or it could be depending on your decisions with wrex and the way you handle him say you hardened him in ME 1. They may not and end up trying to wipe you out anyway.

[adneate]

Tooneyman wrote...

Or it could be depending on your decisions with wrex and the way you handle him say you hardened him in ME 1. They may not and end up trying to wipe you out anyway.

That conversation has no transfer flag and is meaningless to the future of the series, the only flag pertaining to Wrex is whether he lives or not. Conversations with him will not have any affect on anything he says during the sequel and therefore will have no consequences in ME3.

[Tooneyman]

adneate wrote...

Tooneyman wrote...

Or it could be depending on your decisions with wrex and the way you handle him say you hardened him in ME 1. They may not and end up trying to wipe you out anyway.

That conversation has no transfer flag and is meaningless to the future of the series, the only flag pertaining to Wrex is whether he lives or not. Conversations with him will not have any affect on anything he says during the sequel and therefore will have no consequences in ME3.

Yeah, but the problem is its there. Thats the problem. This opens up the doors to those plot holes from the guys at the fight the plot thread and no I don't want them in here. Its just makes you , but i do see what your saying, but at the same time. Its there, Bioware should have really thought about that before they stuck it in. Like we wouldn't notice it.