303 réponses à ce sujet

[Xilizhra]

A topic that bleeds into many a thread. So let's do one about this topic alone.

I, for one, don't mind Paragon items turning out well; generally speaking, Bioware writes them well, and while negative consequences could certainly lead to more drama, I'm not unsatisfied with what we have now.

Also, Renegades bitter about the outcome of Paragon choices (naming no names) are... well, wankers. Why worry about the outcome of choices you don't take?

[CroGamer002]

A lot of people don't get it that you can't play RPG wrong.

[AntiChri5]

I think it is mostly repressed guilt. They can't deal with what they have done, and lash out at Paragons.

[Talogrungi]

The thing that I dislike about Paragon options (in ME1) is that they typically resulted in additional content in ME2, whereas Renegade options didn't.

• Save the Rachni in ME1, you get some continuity dialogue in ME2 on Illium.
• Support Parasini in ME1, you get a tiny sidequest and some additional dialogue in ME2.
• Spare Fist in ME1 and you get a bonus encounter in ME2.
• Spare Helena Blake in ME1 and you get a bonus encounter in ME2.
• Help people in ME1, you get a variety of thank-you mails and such.

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any Renegade ME1 decisions that resulted in exclusive ME2 content.
Admittedly, it's a minor grumble in the large scheme of things, but still a valid criticism in my opinion. Bioware does seem to favour Paragons in this.

Modifié par Talogrungi, 17 octobre 2010 - 03:43 .

[Xilizhra]

Ah. Well, I don't take Renegade options, so I don't really mind what they get; I wish you luck in ME3 rectifying this (even though I can't help but feel a bit smug about being on the right side).

[upsettingshorts]

I've called for it a bunch of times and I play Paragon.

It's just that I don't think my offers of second chances and belief that everything's going to turn out alright anyway shouldn't always work out.

That, and Renegade players have an excellent point in that they don't gain much of anything for their choices and instead simply have content "removed" from the sequel.

Xilizhra wrote...

Ah. Well, I don't take Renegade options, so I don't really mind what they get; I wish you luck in ME3 rectifying this (even though I can't help but feel a bit smug about being on the right side).

There is no right side.  It's about supporting features they've implemented.  Why even include a Renegade dynamic if it isn't going to be fully supported?

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 17 octobre 2010 - 03:47 .

[anmiro]

lol. Yeah, I dont know why we don't get more feed back from the people we kill as renegades. Its really unfair.

Modifié par anmiro, 17 octobre 2010 - 03:48 .

[AntiChri5]

They decided to have one path unlock very little content and references, for the default that people who didn't play ME 1.

They could make this either Paragon or Renegade. I think it makes more sense as Renegade, since they leave so few things unresolved. Renegades dont leave threads dangling. Also, there were more people who played ME 1 as Renegade then Paragon, so it had more broad appeal and would be best as the default.

[Talogrungi]

Xilizhra wrote...

Ah. Well, I don't take Renegade options, so I don't really mind what they get; I wish you luck in ME3 rectifying this (even though I can't help but feel a bit smug about being on the right side).

There is no right side in an RPG.

Like most people, I've played through both games multiple times .. pure Paragon, pure Renegade and my preferred "canon" option which falls somewhere in the middle, avoiding both the pantomine villain and boy-scout mentalities.

The disparity is just a bit annoying.

I feel the same way about how choosing neutral options gimps your character.

[Xilizhra]

I'm always pure Paragon. I can't really be a dick, or leave wrongs unrighted... even though having the scars would be awesome.

That, and Renegade players have an excellent point in that they don't gain much of anything for their choices and instead simply have content "removed" from the sequel.

I'm happy to have it, but I also enjoy my Paragon rewards.

[SimonTheFrog]

I agree that it's annoying that only paragons get the cameo of former encounters. But it's in the nature of things: if you shoot people dead you won't see them later... unless they have a brother who looks just like them of course.
But here's the thing: renegade is a bit too often very radical. Being renegade, at least in my view, shouldn't mean being indifferent to living beings at all. So all the killing is a bit wrong (Just saying, you are still some kind of official member of the counsel and human organizations as well.... an unprovoked killing spree is not really good for any of this).
Also, it would be possible to have more repercussions in ME2 from all the killings. Like Fists brother showing up and seeking revenge.

So, just not having any content at all for all the renegade choice feels very much uninspired or simply a cheap way to cut costs.

Modifié par SimonTheFrog, 17 octobre 2010 - 04:02 .

[Zulu_DFA]

AntiChri5 wrote...

I think it is mostly repressed guilt. They can't deal with what they have done, and lash out at Paragons.

I think it's mostly the repressed guilt that makes people play Paragon. They know they aren't such goody-two-shoes IRL, as the society expects of them, so they can at least compensate for it in the game.

We, Renegades, the jerks, want to deny them this opportunity and make them face who they are, just as we do. We want BioWare to do them a favor.

[Xilizhra]

Um... it is kind of a game. And I've also never thought that I'm like Shepard; I play her to create a story that I want to see..

[Saibh]

Talogrungi wrote...

The thing that I dislike about Paragon options (in ME1) is that they typically resulted in additional content in ME2, whereas Renegade options didn't.

Off the top of my head, I can't think of any Renegade ME1 decisions that resulted in exclusive ME2 content.
Admittedly, it's a minor grumble in the large scheme of things, but still a valid criticism in my opinion. Bioware does seem to favour Paragons in this.

Whenever topics like this come up, usually my argument in favor of Paragon/good is that, generally, good characters are required to give things up to be good. Giving up money, giving up satisfaction, giving up revenge, giving up weapons and armor, and so on, with the only reward being people telling you how great you are. It's usually the "bad" characters that come out on top with extra bonuses (in fact, a lot of games that have powers linked up to morality almost always give the best powers to the "bad" side--I'm lookin' at you, KotOR 2).

But because of the import thing, I'm not sure that argument is valid. You bring up a lot of good points--Paragons get exclusive content, and Renegades do not. I think this is the worst side effect. There is no right or wrong with ME2's morality meter, and we have yet to see which decisions are the "best" decisions. But I am in favor of more exclusive Renegade import decisions.

I think we should keep in mind that often the Renegade thing to do is to kill someone, so...well, don't expect everyone to get a Lazarus Project.

This coming from an almost exclusively Paragon player.

Zulu_DFA wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...

I think it is mostly repressed guilt. They can't deal with what they have done, and lash out at Paragons.

I think it's mostly the repressed guilt that makes people play Paragon. They know they aren't such goody-two-shoes IRL, as the society expects of them, so they can at least compensate for it in the game.

We, Renegades, the jerks, want to deny them this opportunity and make them face who they are, just as we do. We want BioWare to do them a favor.

...I don't push people out windows or electrocute people or punch people who ask me snide questions. I only ever feel guilty when playing Renegade.

Modifié par Saibh, 17 octobre 2010 - 04:07 .

[Saibh]

double

Modifié par Saibh, 17 octobre 2010 - 04:07 .

[knightnblu]

Well, I believe that Renegades have a gripe. Why can't they enjoy unique benefits in game sequels like the good guys? I think that ME3 should allow Renegades to experience arrest warrants, litigation, and the friends and relatives of those that they killed or screwed over to hunt them down and try to kill them. That way, we all get what we deserve and we can all be happy about it ;-p

[Dean_the_Young]

I'm against any roleplay system in which one path virtually always comes out fine and best, while other paths can fail/be detrimental in outcome and content.



I have nothing against Paragon decisions being rewarded, and sometimes being rewarded more for greater risks. The Rachni is a good decision point. But I am against Paragon decisions always being rewarded, regardless the risk, and equally or greater than Renegade choices.



To date, there have been... maybe one decision, keeping the Collector Base, to which the Renegade decision might be better... or might not, as plenty of people have voiced expectations that keeping the base is traded off by losing equivalent support from the Council races. In which case it's a zero-net-sum gain.

[upsettingshorts]

Xilizhra wrote...

I'm always pure Paragon. I can't really be a dick, or leave wrongs unrighted... even though having the scars would be awesome.

My point is and always has been though that being the good guy should be hard.  That's part of what makes it so admirable.

I play leaning good in almost all games - unless I'm deliberately RPing something else  but even then I don't really enjoy it that much - but I feel it cheapens the experience when being good ends up being so easy.  It should make me ask harder questions and jump over bigger hurdles.

If it's easy and the right thing to do, it's not much of a choice to make, and that's a wasted opportunity for a memorable experience.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 17 octobre 2010 - 04:09 .

[PauseforEffect]

Not so much renegade options are being punished but rather that's what happens when you choose the options to shoot everyone. Karma is demonstrated that way. Not an issue of being good or bad in morals, but just the consequences of what is done to people and their reactions (or lack thereof).

[Talogrungi]

I'm really not a fan of "pure" runs, either Paragon or Renegade.

"Pure" Paragon just feels illogical to the point of absurdity. If I'm facing a small army of mercenaries and I have the opportunity (via a Renegade interrupt) to even the playing field somewhat, not taking that opportunity just seems .. silly. Especially when you're just gonna shoot everyone regardless of the morality path you're following.

Likewise with "Pure" Renegade. Letting someone die who may have valuable information doesn't make sense given that I can, (via a Paragon interrupt) keep them alive for long enough to question them and possibly find out what I need to know.

Showing mercy to the morally corrupt, and/or needlessly slaughtering the innocent doesn't appeal.

[SimonTheFrog]

Zulu_DFA wrote...

AntiChri5 wrote...

I think it is mostly repressed guilt. They can't deal with what they have done, and lash out at Paragons.

I think it's mostly the repressed guilt that makes people play Paragon. They know they aren't such goody-two-shoes IRL, as the society expects of them, so they can at least compensate for it in the game.

We, Renegades, the jerks, want to deny them this opportunity and make them face who they are, just as we do. We want BioWare to do them a favor.

Hahaha... that might even be true, even if it reads like a satire. Well, at least i play paragon because it gives me a warm fuzzy feeling being as good as i won't ever be in real life. 
But i dont need somebody to tell me that i only roleplay this... this is a weird idea.

[upsettingshorts]

PrimalEden wrote...

Not so much renegade options are being punished but rather that's what happens when you choose the options to shoot everyone. Karma is demonstrated that way. Not an issue of being good or bad in morals, but just the consequences of what is done to people and their reactions (or lack thereof).

Well the problem there is that I really don't think Mass Effect 1 or 2 does at all a good job at deciding what Renegade Shepard is.

Is he a coldly expedient problem solver? If so, he ought to be rewarded for doing the smart thing as opposed to the right thing.  The reward for doing the right thing is feeling good about yourself, and having others feel good about you. Note: This is how I think he ought to be, as the right thing vs. smart thing makes for interesting decisions.

Is he a psychopathic bad-ass who kills for sport? If so, well... I have a hard time coming up with anything for this one.  But plenty of Renegade actions in Mass Effect qualify for this label, no matter how little it makes sense for someone like that to rise to the rank of Lieutenant Commander in a civilized military force, let alone command the respect of level headed subordinates or a person like Captain Anderson.

Is he dedicated to human dominance in the galaxy? If so, he ought to be rewarded by the end of Mass Effect 3 with just that - humanity in control of the galaxy.  The problem is  this really only comes up in a small handful of major decisions (endgame of both ME1 and ME2, for example) and can't be the basis for his entire character.  The downside is all the aliens hate you, but if you're roleplaying this Shepard, you don't really care about them.

Paragon Shepard however can be easily categorized:  Right makes might.  He's a good guy, he sets an example, and he still gets the job done.  He's a consistent character.  Renegade Shepard's inconsistency makes playing any of the above three options problematic, and impossible with any consistency. 

Needless to say, combined with my earlier posts it's safe to say I think Renegade Shepard has a lot of problems.

Talogrungi wrote...

I'm really not a fan of "pure" runs, either Paragon or Renegade.

Me neither, which is why I cheat to max out my Paragon/Renegade pools and make up my own mind without having to metagame my points.  I end up roughly 65/35 in favor of Paragon on my canon playthrough, though I haven't decided what I'm doing with a lot of decisions yet.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 17 octobre 2010 - 04:22 .

[rwilli80]

I don't remember but isn't letting Blake live in ME1 a renegade option? I thought trying to arrest her was the paragon action. Also letting Fist live should have bite the paragon in the ass instead of just some stupid dialog he could have tried to come at you for bringing down his criminal enterprise on the citadel with a new gang or something or higher some mercs to try and bring you down. Also whatever happened with bring down the sky.. as a paragon you let the guy walk to save the workers, could have had a good encounter in me2 to resolve that even if the guy ended up as a blue sun and then you could have brought him some righteous judgment.

[Saibh]

Talogrungi wrote...

I'm really not a fan of "pure" runs, either Paragon or Renegade.

"Pure" Paragon just feels illogical to the point of absurdity. If I'm facing a small army of mercenaries and I have the opportunity (via a Renegade interrupt) to even the playing field somewhat, not taking that opportunity just seems .. silly. Especially when you're just gonna shoot everyone regardless of the morality path you're following.

Likewise with "Pure" Renegade. Letting someone die who may have valuable information doesn't make sense given that I can, (via a Paragon interrupt) keep them alive for long enough to question them and possibly find out what I need to know.

Showing mercy to the morally corrupt, and/or needlessly slaughtering the innocent doesn't appeal.

My biggest gripe is that the game then punishes you for thinking like that. As if someone who takes what is the most pragmatic, intelligent route would then be too foolish to learn how to convince people by either Charming or Intimidating them (or taking a third route).

[Dean_the_Young]

PrimalEden wrote...

Not so much renegade options are being punished but rather that's what happens when you choose the options to shoot everyone. Karma is demonstrated that way. Not an issue of being good or bad in morals, but just the consequences of what is done to people and their reactions (or lack thereof).

Karma is a superstition that seems reasonable by selective self-centric modeling that attributes a fallacy of correlating cause and effect to things the mind selectively remembers.

It's no more true than how depressed people can only see the bad things in life and ignore the good, while people in optimistic states of mind ignore and quickly forget annoyances and irritations.