303 réponses à ce sujet

[upsettingshorts]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Calling for other players to be punished for their choices sounds a lot like the crap that goes on in MMOs all the time where certain players are constantly whining and screaming and crying about how classes they don't play need to be "nerfed".

Which is why no-one is actually saying that, and the thread topic is a benign misrepresentation of the position.

[Moiaussi]

Schattenkeil wrote...

I don't know. I find it a little cheap. I would have found it better if you had to really work to avoid conflicts between the rachni and the rest of the galaxy. If you choose to let them live you're responsible for them and that's as much a burden as it is a boon so to say.

Though in Mass Effect 2 it was neither, really. Just an encounter on Illium.

Your wish may yet happen. What were you expecting from a one-way communication strictly to Shepard? What happens when they actually show up is anybody's guess..... Anything from having to talk down allied fleets scared of a second Rachni war to them becoming indoctrinated again.... (course regardless, that would be 'more content for paragons, which is appearantly 'bad').

I just find it cheap that playing the good guy invariably leads to positive consequences. Being an idialist should not be that easy under that circumstances. It would make the decision to stand up to a certain ideal more meaningful if you knew that your decisions can actually "bite you in the ass", as Wrex puts it when you let the rachni queen go. I am not a paragon because I know that it leads invariably to the best immediate consequences, but because it's the only path to a galaxy of mutual understanding. Because I think it's important for the future to live the values I cherish. That's often a difficult decision and it would be a lot more meaningful if it didn't mean you'd end up invariably on the winning side, so to say.

There are two independant concerns in this thread though... one saying 'but renegades have less content because of a lack of followups' and one saying 'but paragons are always shown to be making the 'right' decisions.'

The problem is those are competing concepts. Making the right decisions means that it is a safer galaxy, which means less content. Hence the feeling that some of the renegades (not all) want their cake and to eat it too.....

[Moiaussi]

Shandepared wrote...

What in the hell are you talking about?

Alright then, let's start over.

All I am trying to do is offer suggestions that would improve the game so that every player can enjoy it. I don't want to see paragon players "punished" in any real capacity. I'd like to see a few paragon decisions that don't turn out for the better, but I think that should be the exception not the rule. Paragon decisions should backfire only enough so that the player always has to think very seriously about what the consequences will be if they turn out to be wrong.

This is (mostly) legitmate. I think that renegades should sometimes have gotten thank you letters (or thank you visits) too. Something to let them know when they have made a good choice.

This is a discussion forum, not a roleplay forum.

Exactly... just was uncertain if you were confusing that when you discuss options that would be expected to mean less content (killing, usually). Every one of the substitutes you suggested would *also*  be theoretically available for paragons, so if they only showed up for renegades, it would really just be contrived.

[Kaiser Shepard]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

One could argue that not having that one encounter with Fist or the 'rachni-ambassador' is a reward in itself.

Personally, I could care less if the only things one can miss out on are small conversations like these. Especially after the whole screw-up with Dragon Age, where one of the choices from Origins is clearly presented as the wrong one in Awakening by not being acknowledged in any way.

Which one is that?

The last major choice in the game, which leads to the "US ending". I'm not going to in-depth on it here as to avoid spoilers, but suffice it to say that none of the post-Origins DLC and Awakening make any sense if you follow that path.

[Dean_the_Young]

Neither does importing a dead character for those DLC, so...

The point of the Ultimate Sacrifice was always that it was the Ultimate Sacrifice, the end of the Warden, the destruction of soul, etc. etc. There should have been no importing that character to play in another story and then assume he was Pavlov's Warden out of the box.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 18 octobre 2010 - 07:05 .

[TMA LIVE]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Neither does importing a dead character for those DLC, so...

The point of the Ultimate Sacrifice was always that it was the Ultimate Sacrifice, the end of the Warden, the destruction of soul, etc. etc. There should have been no importing that character to play in another story and then assume he was Pavlov's Warden out of the box.

But you can still import your choices, right? With DA DLC, you can play a completely different Warden, but your other character's choices still carry over right?

[Dean_the_Young]

Nope. While I understand the appeal for being to import a dead Warden file but start with a new one, that was never an option, or said to be. The Orlesian/created Wardens goes with a 'default' backstory, which is deliberatly vague enough to not cause conflicts.

[TheBlackBaron]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Nope. While I understand the appeal for being to import a dead Warden file but start with a new one, that was never an option, or said to be. The Orlesian/created Wardens goes with a 'default' backstory, which is deliberatly vague enough to not cause conflicts.

Technical difficulties, I believe. DA:O seems to have a lot of those.

We may complain about the relative weakness of ME2's continuity, but at least they managed to get the flags imported correctly (Conrad Verner being the exception that proves the point), and have the prospect of ME3 to bring it on home.

But I'm veering into OT rant territory.

[HTTP 404]

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.

• 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.

play devils advocate, that makes Renegade story more Canon-like.  that doesnt seem like favortism

[TheBlackBaron]

Um...to actually contribute something to this thread, I'll echo what Shand and others have been saying. It's not that Paragon players must be punished as some sort of iron decree, it's just that they need to backfire sometimes if BioWare wants to maintain the illusion that choices matter. Otherwise there's no point in ever pursuing the Renegade path.



Balak and the consequences of letting him go in BDtS would have been a textbook example of where to apply this. Sadly this was not the case - apart from a news blurb about Kate Bowman and the survivors having some sort of rally for Shepard (or whatever it was, it's been a while since I heard it), nothing comes of it.

[oyukichan]

Shandepared wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Renegade decisions are just rewarded immediately - whether it is making the next conflict easier (multiple examlpes of this in both games)...

Such as?


...or a material reward (credits or equipment).

Like when?

Seriously!?  If someone has already answered this (I've refrained from answering others so that I could read the rest of the posts, but I can't let this one go), then I'm sorry.

In ME1 (taking Renegade option):
If you help Schells, you get money.
If you help what's-her-asari-face on Noveria, you get money.
If you browbeat the hanar on Noveria, you get money.  If you take the package for yourself, you get whatever is in it.
This one might be a bit of a stretch, but if you help the asari diplomat kill her pirate sister (man, I cannot believe I am having such difficulty remembering these names!) and then are okay with it, you get access to prototypes.

In ME2 (I can only think of one off the top of my head as I have recently gone back for another playthrough of ME1):
If you shock the Blue Suns mechanic (Renegade interrupt), the gunship battle is less difficult.

There is plenty immediate reward for Renegade actions.  But as someone else has already said, the Renegade rewards are more readily reaped.  The Paragon rewards take a little more time.  However, it must be noted that this does not hold true for every Renegade or Paragon option.  As is true in real life.

But really, this is why I play a Paragade.  I like a mix of both and have yet to have an issue with the results of my actions not playing out the way I want them to, beyond a couple of instances where Shep's actual dialogue did not properly reflect the meaning behind the text on the dialogue wheel.  I have a purely Paragon and an almost purely Renegade Shep (I just cannot be mean to my crew), but my canon (and favorite) Shep is a mix of both Paragon and Renegade.  And even as a Paragade, she was able to charm both Miranda/Jack & Tali/Legion into getting along. 

[oyukichan]

Shandepared wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

In ME 1 you get an opportunity to get more experience and credits and potential equipment for every enemy you defeat...For example, if you kill Helena Blake and raid her complex...if kill Major Kyle and all of his follower's...etc.

More experience points? Sure but if you charm/intimidate her you can raid the complex anyway. Plus, those experience points don't get you anything if you are already at the level-cap.

The other things you mentioned are in ME2 and they all have paragon counterparts.

I could be wrong but I'm fairly certain that the only way you can raid Blake's complex is if you kill her.  I usually charm her and she will not let me just walk around.  I get booted out of the complex because "authority makes her employees uneasy" or some such.

[D.Sharrah]

Aurin -



Thank You. Exactly what I was trying to say...

[Jabarai]

Woodsworth wrote...

..... My favorite examples of the forced morality in the game are the renegade interrupts that involve surprising hostile enemies (someone mentions this already). Why the heck is this considered renegade? Why does the paragon route in this situation involve being stupid. I'm not distracting a target by shooting baby; I just don't want to hear him ramble on about his races superiority. Now I can't charm my teammates out of an argument. Why the hell not. Do they not think I'm nice enough anymore because I shot a hostile enemy while he was talking? Did they think it was rude to not let him finish?

It wasn't rude but rather dishonourable as the krogan was expecting a retort. And the line "you talk too much" was tacky and unneeded. I wouldn't consider that sort of Shepard a good paragon leader. If you had the option of shooting the tank when the battle commences, I'd be perfectly okay with doing it.

But you do have a point. Another fairly similar case happens on the 'Archangel' where you have the opportunity to knock out the helicopter pilot while he's looking away. This was the first and only time where being more of a paragon made me pass the chance just for the sake of it being labeled as renegade. I would've liked to see both options blinking with both offering slightly different outcomes.

[Markinator_123]

Jabarai wrote...

Woodsworth wrote...

..... My favorite examples of the forced morality in the game are the renegade interrupts that involve surprising hostile enemies (someone mentions this already). Why the heck is this considered renegade? Why does the paragon route in this situation involve being stupid. I'm not distracting a target by shooting baby; I just don't want to hear him ramble on about his races superiority. Now I can't charm my teammates out of an argument. Why the hell not. Do they not think I'm nice enough anymore because I shot a hostile enemy while he was talking? Did they think it was rude to not let him finish?

It wasn't rude but rather dishonourable as the krogan was expecting a retort. And the line "you talk too much" was tacky and unneeded. I wouldn't consider that sort of Shepard a good paragon leader. If you had the option of shooting the tank when the battle commences, I'd be perfectly okay with doing it.

But you do have a point. Another fairly similar case happens on the 'Archangel' where you have the opportunity to knock out the helicopter pilot while he's looking away. This was the first and only time where being more of a paragon made me pass the chance just for the sake of it being labeled as renegade. I would've liked to see both options blinking with both offering slightly different outcomes.

What about Miranda's loyalty mission where the renegade option has Shepard breaking that merc's neck mid-sentence? Was that dishonourable too?

[jbblue05]

Paragons are metagamers if Bioware severely punished Paragons. Paragons would make the Renegade decisions to have a "more peaceful universe" or be too self-righteous to change their decisons.



Being a renegade isn't about immediate satisfaction like being a paragon is.

Renegade is thinking long-term or the bigger picture nobody likes you until they see your decisions pay off.

ME3 is the perfect time to reward renegades and have some paragon decisions backfire.



I don't like all paragon decisions being rewared with zero consequences. Becuase some choices are too naive and trusting. Letting Elnora go was a weak attempt to punish pparagons. All Elnora did was kill a drug dealer who was trying to killing the Eclispe sisters. Plus their is near-zero chance Elnora comes back for vengeance

[Woodsworth]

Jabarai wrote...

Woodsworth wrote...

..... My favorite examples of the forced morality in the game are the renegade interrupts that involve surprising hostile enemies (someone mentions this already). Why the heck is this considered renegade? Why does the paragon route in this situation involve being stupid. I'm not distracting a target by shooting baby; I just don't want to hear him ramble on about his races superiority. Now I can't charm my teammates out of an argument. Why the hell not. Do they not think I'm nice enough anymore because I shot a hostile enemy while he was talking? Did they think it was rude to not let him finish?

It wasn't rude but rather dishonourable as the krogan was expecting a retort. And the line "you talk too much" was tacky and unneeded. I wouldn't consider that sort of Shepard a good paragon leader. If you had the option of shooting the tank when the battle commences, I'd be perfectly okay with doing it.

But you do have a point. Another fairly similar case happens on the 'Archangel' where you have the opportunity to knock out the helicopter pilot while he's looking away. This was the first and only time where being more of a paragon made me pass the chance just for the sake of it being labeled as renegade. I would've liked to see both options blinking with both offering slightly different outcomes.

I understand you may consider this dishonorable, but that should be left for the player to feel.  Here is the problem I have with it, you don't get to say anything back to him (if I remember correctly).  He just ends his rant and attacks.  So what do I gain from waiting.  I waste time that could allow something to happen to Mordin's friend (we still think he is kidnapped at this point) and I have to fight another krogan.  They aren't the easiest to take down.  In this case, being a paragon is kinda dumb, and I have never not shot the tank.  Same goes for every situation like this.   I made the decision that was the best in the situation and the game randomly add red points to my red.  Now, this doesn't really bother me and has never affected my gameplay.  Im just trying to make a point.

Like I said, I wish that would just do away with it and let the consequences be what they are.  Make me feel like I did something wrong or right because of what happens, not by adding 15 blue/red points.  Mix up the choices on the dialogue wheel (maybe clear it up abit) and let people think about what to say instead of hold the up button as they skim through dialogue.

Modifié par Woodsworth, 18 octobre 2010 - 10:40 .

[Giggles_Manically]

@ The Renegade Players:

[upsettingshorts]

Giggles_Manically wrote...

@ The Renegade Players:

I'm a Paragon player who wishes his Shepard's naivety would blow up in his face once or twice.

[Moiaussi]

jbblue05 wrote...

Paragons are metagamers if Bioware severely punished Paragons. Paragons would make the Renegade decisions to have a "more peaceful universe" or be too self-righteous to change their decisons.

Being a renegade isn't about immediate satisfaction like being a paragon is.
Renegade is thinking long-term or the bigger picture nobody likes you until they see your decisions pay off.
ME3 is the perfect time to reward renegades and have some paragon decisions backfire.

I don't like all paragon decisions being rewared with zero consequences. Becuase some choices are too naive and trusting. Letting Elnora go was a weak attempt to punish pparagons. All Elnora did was kill a drug dealer who was trying to killing the Eclispe sisters. Plus their is near-zero chance Elnora comes back for vengeance

Reread her confession/diary entry. She didn't kill him 'to protect her sisters.' She killed him in a particularly gruesome way for the enjoyment. Also I take it that you are in the group who feels that an extra encounter would be a bad thing?

Modifié par Moiaussi, 18 octobre 2010 - 11:23 .

[brfritos]

TheBlackBaron wrote...

Um...to actually contribute something to this thread, I'll echo what Shand and others have been saying. It's not that Paragon players must be punished as some sort of iron decree, it's just that they need to backfire sometimes if BioWare wants to maintain the illusion that choices matter. Otherwise there's no point in ever pursuing the Renegade path.

Balak and the consequences of letting him go in BDtS would have been a textbook example of where to apply this. Sadly this was not the case - apart from a news blurb about Kate Bowman and the survivors having some sort of rally for Shepard (or whatever it was, it's been a while since I heard it), nothing comes of it.

Well there's the "big choices group" if you want to discuss this.

If you really think about it, with a few exceptions, there isn't much moments in the game where your decisions really affect Shepard, being renegade or paragon.

And I mean decisions like having or not Conrad Verner in the game, for example (forget the renegade/paragon).
If you have him, you gain the discount on Illium.
If you don't Shepard are screwed, because the upgrades will cost a lot more to buy.

Manny people cited Gianna Parsini, but even she is a bad example.
In ME1 you have the classic renegade decision, telling about her to Administrator Anoleis, wich will end with both dead.
But you have a second option, give the evidence to Lorik Qui'in, go talk to her and tell her that you didn't help because she is a stuck up b****.

Then enter ME2 and even if I betray her and tell her to f*** off, she still ask for my help?
This is a joke, right? <_<

[jbblue05]

Moiaussi wrote...

Reread her confession/diary entry. She didn't kill him 'to protect her sisters.' She killed him in a particularly gruesome way for the enjoyment. Also I take it that you are in the group who feels that an extra encounter would be a bad thing?

Your missing the point she killed a drug dealer who was trying to kill them.
Elnora is a coward she probably recorded that message while other eclispe sisters were around.

I doubt Elnora is going to go around killing innocents for the lulz.
Even when the Eclipse sisters outnumbered Shepard she ranned and hide.
This is a decision that is highly likely to not bite you in the ass

[doagrl]

jbblue05 wrote...

Moiaussi wrote...

Reread her confession/diary entry. She didn't kill him 'to protect her sisters.' She killed him in a particularly gruesome way for the enjoyment. Also I take it that you are in the group who feels that an extra encounter would be a bad thing?

Your missing the point she killed a drug dealer who was trying to kill them.
Elnora is a coward she probably recorded that message while other eclispe sisters were around.

I doubt Elnora is going to go around killing innocents for the lulz.
Even when the Eclipse sisters outnumbered Shepard she ranned and hide.
This is a decision that is highly likely to not bite you in the ass

That's not why she killed him, she killed him for her uniform basically to earn her way into Eclipse. She was just starting her career like the detective tells you at the end but there is no doubt that she would end up killing again.

And that is a Paragon decision that would come back to bite those who don't pay attention in the ass because they've let a cold blooded killer go free.

Maybe in ME3, Paragons (& others who didn't heed the words of Pitne For) will get to face off again with Elnora perhaps next time she will be the Captain of Eclipse on Illium. That would certainly qualify as a Paragon act that went very wrong (of course it would also mean extra content so not sure how people would respond to that).

Modifié par doagrl, 19 octobre 2010 - 01:13 .

[kazaam_shaq]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

I'm a Paragon player who wishes his Shepard's naivety would blow up in his face once or twice.

Same here. Seems like Paragon Shep gets off a little too easy at times.

[AresXX7]

AurinShepard wrote...

Shandepared wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

In ME 1 you get an opportunity to get more experience and credits and potential equipment for every enemy you defeat...For example, if you kill Helena Blake and raid her complex...if kill Major Kyle and all of his follower's...etc.

More experience points? Sure but if you charm/intimidate her you can raid the complex anyway. Plus, those experience points don't get you anything if you are already at the level-cap.

The other things you mentioned are in ME2 and they all have paragon counterparts.

I could be wrong but I'm fairly certain that the only way you can raid Blake's complex is if you kill her.  I usually charm her and she will not let me just walk around.  I get booted out of the complex because "authority makes her employees uneasy" or some such.

Really? I wonder if that some sort of bug. I've used the charm option, heard the "authority makes her employees uneasy" dialogue, but I just go around her & loot the crates, etc. I just don't pull out my gun or try to talk to them while I'm doing it (accidentally did that once during the Major Kyle mission & had to kill everyone) and they just stood there ignoring me.