305 réponses à ce sujet

[Zulu_DFA]

Up with that is your misunderstanding of what the Paragon is. The Paragon isn't an "I distrust Cerberus" guy. Because, you know, there are renegades who distrust Cerberus just as bitterly as you.

[Zulu_DFA]

yorkj86 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Up with that is your misunderstanding of what the Paragon is. The Paragon isn't an "I distrust Cerberus" guy. Because, you know, there are renegades who distrust Cerberus just as bitterly as you.

Isn't this a further demonstration of the inadequacy of the Paragon/Renegade system?

Truthfully, I would like too that the Renegade was more about Cerberus loyalty, calculated violence and ruthless efficiency than anything else, but that's obviously not what BioWare has in mind.

Just read the loading screens tips. They designate the Renegade as "badass". Of the ME2 characters Grunt is much closer to the "pure" Renegade ideal than TIM is. Renegade Shepard must do "cool stuff" to entertain kids behind the controller, such as headbutting krogans and punching reporers/scientists.

By contrast, the Paragon must be a mommy's boy scout, and being nice to TIM and Liara (about her handing over Shepard's body to Cerberus) falls better with that.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 05 novembre 2010 - 03:58 .

[DaBigDragon]

Samara's like an extreme form of Paragon.

[SimonTheFrog]

I think everything essential to this topic has been said: Samara lives by the code, which is something different from paragade. But if you want to see paragon as lawful, it's maybe similar to that, even if the law is kinda harsh some times.



Apart from that this thread turned into another paragade discussion and i have to agree with Zulu, Paragade is in most cases simply boy-scout vs. jerk. All the sophisticated alignments like "ethical correctness" versus "get's the job done at all costs" are only very partially represented in the actual game. There are occasions where it fits, but then again there are a lot of other occasions where its just a silly boy-scout versus jerk again.

So, in this mess people pick what they WANT to see and this is how any discussion becomes pretty futile.



BioWare should probably have considered a more honest approach to the moral system and call it "nice" versus "nasty". They didn't want to repeat the jedi versus sith moral axis but in fact, a lot of this thinking spilled into the game. I think it's basically inertia that caused all this mess.



Which is too bad, because the "ethical" versus "practical" axis could have been very inspiring if done consequently. Because both can feel wrong at times but right at others. So the player would actually have to think instead of yanking the button in the same direction all the time. Hints of that are the genophage stuff.



But that would have required a more thorough oversight over what all the writers are doing. Which didn't happen... so here we go.

[Zulu_DFA]

yorkj86 wrote...

I think that saying that Samara is Lawful Neutral

Is TIM "Neutral Evil" by that classification?

[SimonTheFrog]

Tim is chaotic neutral i think: he kills innocents but also saves some others.

[Dean_the_Young]

yorkj86 wrote...

Zulu_DFA wrote...

Shepard's morality is your morality (or the one you invent anyway when you create a character), so it can't flip-flop during the game, unless it's your own fault. The game's trying to shoehorn and trick you into taking certain options, often via a discrepancy between the dialogue wheel line and the phrase Shepard actually delivers when you click it, is a whole another matter.

The actual problem is that the paragon-renegade meter is overrated, and often used to describe Shepard's alignment and compare it to those of other characters. And even BioWare writers themselves fall in this pit often when writing the dialogue and behavior options for Shepard. I believe it would be better if Shepard's options were held against the three psychological profiles (Hero, Survivor, Ruthless).

Paragons start ME2 by distrusting Cerberus.  At the Collector ship mission, it defends the way TIM set him and his crew up.  At the suicide mission, Paragon is back to distrusting TIM and what Cerberus will do with the Collector ship.

What's up with that?

Simple: Paragon and Renegade are mindsets and approaches, not absolute pro/anti political positions.

[Dean_the_Young]

yorkj86 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

When do we ever see or hear of her protecting the wicked, as opposed to punishing? About the only case I can think of is when her presence prevented a pirate attack on a ship she was on.

Samara spent hundreds of years hunting down Morinth to punish her. When she travelled, as she tells us, people brought past wrongs to her attention and she metted out punishment.

She let Nihlus go in order to save the life of an innocent he was holding hostage.

That really isn't 'defense' as much as 'code obligated priorities while already Code-obligated to kill Nihlus.' Nighlus put the innocent in danger as a distraction only after Samara persued him for another act.

Also, before she became a Justicar, she had a rather strong grasp of morality.  When she was a mercenary, she discovered that her company was moving slaves as cargo, aboard a ship.  She killed everyone aboard the ship (likely everyone who ignored/refused her objections) and then instructed the slaves on the virtues of self-defense.

And?

That was before she was a Justicar. She is a justicar now.

[Dean_the_Young]

DaBigDragon wrote...

Samara's like an extreme form of Paragon.

How many Paragons openly and freely admit to being willing to kill every single person who lauded them as a hero if they broke laws?

[Destroy Raiden_]

I agree with OP even if you where para if Samara finds her code says to kill people who've broken a code it may seem minor to use she's demonstrated herself she's not above killing people to get info she did with those Eclipse girls sure they kill to get their uniforms but before she came into their lives what where they doing to her? Nothing they where doing illegal things which is against ( most likely) her code so she storms in looking for her criminal and decides to take advantage of the situation and get a few other criminals by proxy. If you've smuggled, stolen, looted, or shot a victim to save them under her code (most likely) you're now on her criminal list. She most likely would've kept hunting down Nailus if he was still alive we knew him as bold and upstanding she knew him differently thats all that mattered to the code what he did in the past compelled her to hunt him down till death. Is the code capable of allowing her to forget past crimes? Will saving the galaxy be enough justification to her code to allow any slip ups of para sheps? who knows but by the way she's handle code related missions so far I'm guessing not and in a way in 3 if she comes in and say yeah I know you looted from all those criminals but you still stole but you saved the galaxy so I won't go all Justicar on you I'd be disappointed I'd rather not have Samara give up this code she's been so passionate with just because my para saved the galaxy I know it'd come down to a her vs me and one of us isn't walking away but it'd fit her character and I wouldn't have it any other way if I had to deal with her.

[General User]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

DaBigDragon wrote...

Samara's like an extreme form of Paragon.

How many Paragons openly and freely admit to being willing to kill every single person who lauded them as a hero if they broke laws?

umm... just the extreme ones?    Kidding!  The idea of "kill every single person who... anything" seems more or less anathema to any sort of human paragon.
 
But seriously… here’s something I’m mulling: if “paragon” could be defined as the living embodiment of an abstract ideal, then paragon Shepard would be the “paragon” of the human military officer or secret agent (strong, brave, intelligent, merciful, wise etc.) while Samara, by virtue of her adherence to the Code would be the “paragon” of asari law. Thoughts anyone?

Modifié par General User, 05 novembre 2010 - 04:59 .

[StarcloudSWG]

It comes down to this:

The Justicar Code puts protecting the innocent above punishing the guilty. For evidence, consider Samara's story about Nihlus. He was clearly guilty of murder, but he got away by forcing Samara into a situation where she could either catch and punish him, or save innocents in danger.

That is why Samara is more sympathetic to Paragons than to Renegades. 

[General User]

That makes sense. The human military ideal is also about protection. It all fits into a neat little package.

[Dean_the_Young]

yorkj86 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

She let Nihlus go in order to save the life of an innocent he was holding hostage.  That really isn't 'defense' as much as 'code obligated priorities while already Code-obligated to kill Nihlus.' Nighlus put the innocent in danger as a distraction only after Samara persued him for another act.

The Code demands impartiality of its enforcers, and Samara tells us herself that the Code exists to protect the innocent and punish the wicked.  She tells Shepard only a few stories, but she's been a Justicar for ~400 years.  Absence of evidence, and so on.

A position made with an absence of support is itself undermined.

'Protecting the innocent' does not, in fact, mean that Samara and her code are defensive, rather than a retributive force. It's the same sort of 'help others' that Mordin exemplifies: sometimes heal people, sometimes kill dangerous people. Either way helps.

Before anyone can posit that Samara is equally defensive and retributive, they need to support the first half. The second half has plenty of examples.

[Dean_the_Young]

StarcloudSWG wrote...

It comes down to this:

The Justicar Code puts protecting the innocent above punishing the guilty. For evidence, consider Samara's story about Nihlus. He was clearly guilty of murder, but he got away by forcing Samara into a situation where she could either catch and punish him, or save innocents in danger.

That is why Samara is more sympathetic to Paragons than to Renegades. 

Favoring the Paragons is one thing. Turning a blind eye and throwing away standards is another. I'd be quite willing to let Samara, the individual, personally favor the Paragons if she held the same Code standard against them.


If this were me, and strictly me, changing this, I would have made the Renegade/Paragon turn-down differentiated only by Samara's line to them. 'I feel a connection,' -insert alignment specific rational- '-but I have seen you do too many things that would come in conflict with my code.'

So, if you were Paragon, 'I admire your compassion and mercy, but it comes with to many failings to my own Code.'
While if you Renegade, "I admire how your dedication to your calling is as strong as my own, but our codes of conduct are too conflicting.'

[RiouHotaru]

 For starters, the Paragon/Renegade was never meant to nor intended to deal with the complex issue of morality.  I don't think it ever was.  Also, applying that system to characters that aren't Shepard is silly, because the other characters are many times more complex.  The system was only designed to be applied to Shepard and Shepard's actions.

Also, the CS mission, isn't a case of flip-flopping.  Paragon's aren't defending TIM, they're diplomatically suggesting that there might be more than one explaination for why it looks like TIM deliberately lead them into a trap. Renegades simply merrily jump to the conclusion that TIM is responsible.

As for Samara, she more's accepting because typically a Paragon holds themselves to a higher moral standard.  But Samara knows that her moral standard isn't your moral standard.  Nor should it be.  She says that Asari usually don't wake up one day and say "I want to be a Justicar!" and that the Code is a strict, hardline moral guide-line.  But that doesn't mean she doesn't see that Shepard is trying very hard to be just in an unjust universe.  Thus, she feels a connection to you because Shepard is at least doing his or her best.  She accepts that her Code just doesn't work for everyone.

[Dean_the_Young]

RiouHotaru wrote...

 For starters, the Paragon/Renegade was never meant to nor intended to deal with the complex issue of morality.  I don't think it ever was.  Also, applying that system to characters that aren't Shepard is silly, because the other characters are many times more complex.  The system was only designed to be applied to Shepard and Shepard's actions.

Rather my point one...

Also, the CS mission, isn't a case of flip-flopping.  Paragon's aren't defending TIM, they're diplomatically suggesting that there might be more than one explaination for why it looks like TIM deliberately lead them into a trap. Renegades simply merrily jump to the conclusion that TIM is responsible.

point two...

As for Samara, she more's accepting because typically a Paragon holds themselves to a higher moral standard.  But Samara knows that her moral standard isn't your moral standard.  Nor should it be.  She says that Asari usually don't wake up one day and say "I want to be a Justicar!" and that the Code is a strict, hardline moral guide-line.  But that doesn't mean she doesn't see that Shepard is trying very hard to be just in an unjust universe.  Thus, she feels a connection to you because Shepard is at least doing his or her best.  She accepts that her Code just doesn't work for everyone.

And we fall back to 'Renegades are unjust' -censored-. And roleplaying -censored- that doesn't even necessarily apply.

Samara doesn't talk about your morals or your intent. In a lot of those, she is Renegade. She talks about your actions. In many of those as well, she is not Paragon.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 05 novembre 2010 - 06:21 .