20 réponses à ce sujet

[Vandrayke]

I always got the impression that while both would try to get from point A to point B, the Paragon would try to get there the "right" way, while the renegade wouldn't care about right or wrong or convention or laws and just would want to get there as directly as possible.

Also, while the paragon might believe more in the possible redemption of someone who made a critical mistake, the renegade might believe more that he needed to be shot so that he couldn't make that mistake again. 

Modifié par Vandrayke, 25 juillet 2010 - 10:16 .

[Maverick827]

distinguetraces wrote...

I've played lengthy chunks of Mass Effect, and I've watched my roommate play through both the first game and the sequel.

Neither of us has ever been able to figure out exactly what a "Paragon" or "Renegade" is really supposed to be. Is a Paragon actually compassionate and generous, or is he just all nicey-nice with people all the time? Or, is he nothing but a pompous stuffed shirt? 

Is a Renegade a rough-and-ready, two-fisted type, or is he more of a twisted douchebag? Sometimes it's one, sometimes the other.

This matters because, with the brief tags offered on the dialogue wheel, you often pick an option based on its "alignment" and are then astonished at what the character supposedly representing you then chooses to say or do. It's still worse in ME2 when you just click a icon to perform a Paragon or Renegade action -- whatever that might mean!

Now, I know I know -- DA2 is not ME. I don't mean to belabor the comparison, but I hope the DA2 writers find a better way to deal with the problem of choosing a response according to broad, vaguely defined character types. I'm worried that giving us three different personalities (as was suggested in one of the previews) will make the choice even more confusing than a simple -- or not so simple, or comprehensible at all -- binary opposition.

Your nose is huge.  Therefore, your opinions are void.

[dan107]

The paragon does what's right, the renegade does what works.

[Bobad]

In ME your overall objective is the same regardless of the path you take to get there, I'd like to see something really special in DA2, where the eventual conclusion is of your iwn making, that would be a special kind of awesome.

[SirOccam]

distinguetraces wrote...

Now, I know I know -- DA2 is not ME. I don't mean to belabor the comparison, but I hope the DA2 writers find a better way to deal with the problem of choosing a response according to broad, vaguely defined character types. I'm worried that giving us three different personalities (as was suggested in one of the previews) will make the choice even more confusing than a simple -- or not so simple, or comprehensible at all -- binary opposition.

It's not "personalities" that show up on the wheel, it's "tone." They've said at least a couple of times that there is no alignment meter--no "right" or "wrong". To put it in a more abstract sense: it's not illustrating your character, it's illustrating the line itself. They are recognizing (and rightly so, IMO) that you can be a "good guy" and still be snarky, or confrontational, or whatever. Personalities are way more complex than "good" or "bad."

I think that's a pretty fundamental shift, and a good sign that the dialogue wheel will work a lot better in DA2 than in ME. In ME, if you wanted to be a Paragon, you chose the Paragon choices. It made no difference whether you were deciding whether or not to extinguish the Rachni race or deciding whether or not to speak politely to someone. In DA2 (at least as it appears so far), it seems your personality will be based on your actions, and not necessarily what dialogue options you choose. And furthermore, it won't be depicted on some meter.

[Vandrayke]

I think they just have to morph two different archetypes and go with them. They can have some core characteristics, but the bottom line is that they will still have their own personalities. If that makes any sense.

[In Exile]

distinguetraces wrote...

Yes, that's how it works ... sometimes. Paragon as lawful good, Renegade as chaotic good. But sometimes it's not like that at all. Sometimes it's concerned with ME's big issue of interspecies racism -- with the renegade as a racial supremacist, which hardly constitutes disregarding convention and laws, and the paragon as more open-minded, which is hardly "by the book."

Think about what Shepard was in ME, though. He was a Spectre. As a Spectre, his "book" was the Council. The Council was an association of races, and so being "by-the-book" as a Spectre meant sacrificing the interests of any one individual species for the greater good of all species, and acting independent of species wherever possible. A renegade, by contrast, worked to stop Saren by whatever means neccesary, independent of the Council.

Or at least that's how it was envisioned, I think.

[Maverick827]

distinguetraces wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...
Your nose is huge.  Therefore, your opinions are void.

I void my nose hugely in your general direction.

I can't help but wonder if there is a Strength requirement to equip that nose.

[AntiChri5]

distinguetraces wrote...

Maverick827 wrote...
Your nose is huge.  Therefore, your opinions are void.

I void my nose hugely in your general direction.

I think you look like a horse.

[Lord Gremlin]

Well, in short Paragon obeys the law and try to achieve his goals with as little violence and destruction as possible. Renegade simply go for his goal and don't hesitate to destroy anything in his path and always chooses quickest, easiest and guaranteed solution.



Also: nose is indeed huge and must be voided.

[Daewan]

Paragon: actions will pass a court-martial.

Renegade: will never face a court-martial because they're too important to risk being locked up.

[Narreneth]

distinguetraces wrote...

Vandrayke wrote...

I always got the impression that while both would try to get from point A to point B, the Paragon would try to get there the "right" way, while the renegade wouldn't care about right or wrong or convention or laws and just would want to get there as directly as possible.

Yes, that's how it works ... sometimes. Paragon as lawful good, Renegade as chaotic good. But sometimes it's not like that at all. Sometimes it's concerned with ME's big issue of interspecies racism -- with the renegade as a racial supremacist, which hardly constitutes disregarding convention and laws, and the paragon as more open-minded, which is hardly "by the book."

Or sometimes the renegade is just dark and gothy for no reason, as with the whole (insufferable! shut up you ridiculous faux-hipster!) Morinth affair.

Anyway, now I really am going on about Mass Effect too much. I just hope that, giving us more directions to go in than just blue and red, the DA team takes us toward greater specificity rather than greater confusion.

Paragon isn't supposed to be "by the book."  ME is not D&D, you can't apply D&D alignments to explain the concept behind Paragon and Renegade.  BioWare has said on numerous occasions that regardless of whether you pick Paragon choices or not, Shepard is supposed to be a hard-ass military type, thus, Paragon is not always going to strictly follow rules or play nice.    If you were put off by the Human-Supremacy as a Renegade you really weren't paying attention to what was said leading up to the choice.  There's always the neutral option as well if you feel the Renegade is too pro-Human.    This is the primary difference between ME's Commander Shepard and DA2's Hawke.  Hawke is not a defined character like Shepard is.  Hawke is not automatically a hard-ass.  There is no morality meter.  You aren't shooting for one or two defined personality sets, you can dynamically choose what you would do in the situation yourself (from a set number of decisions obviously).    I really don't understand why threads like this keep popping up. 

[Narreneth]

distinguetraces wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...
I think you look like a horse.

Nay!

Horse, no.  Mutant ugly?  Yes.  Were you going for the most hideous creation ever?

[Estelindis]

Personally, I would be not at all displeased if the DA2 team implemented something like Alpha Protocol's system. (You play a spy and tend to choose between general attitudes of professional, aggressive, and suave. Of course, the attitude range wouldn't be exactly the same for a fantasy RPG, but the crucial thing to aim for is that none of the choices should make one's PC sound like an irrationally homicidal jerk! If evil is allowed, let it be clever and calculated...)

[Blessed Silence]

I never really thought about it too much in ME .. because punching people and threatening them was way too much fun to care.



Though what I found interesting in the article on DA2 in GI that there is a little icon when you choose a dialogue option, so you can kinda see what type of response it is.



Though I really wish choosing an "alignment" meant more. I guess I'm so used to games with factions in them I'm waiting for my reward for not kicking the crap out of the guy who won't let me into a club.l

[asaiasai]

In ME i often found that once a choice was made (Paragon or Renegade) one was trapped into the path in order to accumulate enough points of one type or another to open up more dialog choices. The Miranda and Jack fight in ME2 was prime example. The real issue i had and i hope it is addressed in DA2 is that i might want to be a Paragon but there might also be someone who needs a good smack but at the risk of not accumulating enough points of one type or the other, i am locked into not what i want to do but more or less what i have to do and that really pushes the player back out of the game. That is why DAO rocked, because could drown puppies, and by having a solid persuasion skill i could convince Leliana to help, or release them convincing Sten to help carry a few.



Asai

[Aratham Darksight]

asaiasai wrote...

In ME i often found that once a choice was made (Paragon or Renegade) one was trapped into the path in order to accumulate enough points of one type or another to open up more dialog choices. The Miranda and Jack fight in ME2 was prime example. The real issue i had and i hope it is addressed in DA2 is that i might want to be a Paragon but there might also be someone who needs a good smack but at the risk of not accumulating enough points of one type or the other, i am locked into not what i want to do but more or less what i have to do and that really pushes the player back out of the game. That is why DAO rocked, because could drown puppies, and by having a solid persuasion skill i could convince Leliana to help, or release them convincing Sten to help carry a few.

Asai

DA2 won't need to address the issue, because it won't be inheriting it from Mass Effect. There will be no alignment, same as in Origins.

Now personally, I didn't feel particularly boxed in even in ME2. I just said whatever I felt appropriate, resulting in a roughly 4:1 Paragon-Renegade ratio and still ended up with enough paragon points to break up the intra-party squabbles peacefully. Of course, I did take the specialization that enhanced my speaking skill, but that's what it's for, isn't it?