195 réponses à ce sujet

[Zulu_DFA]

Xilizhra wrote...

I don't think those are the only two places to use the word. Especially since in court, the term is "not guilty."

Actually "innocent" means "not guilty", in Latin.

Xilizhra wrote...
To put it another way, what the hell are you on about?

I disapprove of substituting the word "bystander" with the word "innocent". But as this forum is overrun by the self-righteous, I go with the flow here, only with quotes. Which are airquotes actually.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 06 novembre 2010 - 02:56 .

[Xilizhra]

I didn't know semantics were a particular issue with Renegades, but all right. "Bystander" doesn't make them any less dead, though.

[Zulu_DFA]

It makes them less emotionally engaging in their misfortune.

[Xilizhra]

Not terribly so in my case. But, as ever, I shall take the action that I feel will lead to a better outcome with an acceptable risk, as you do presumably as well.

[Zulu_DFA]

I'd say, that I don't take the risk at all, since the negative outcome of my decision (death of the hostages) occurs immediately and in over even before the positive outcome comes to fruition (-1 bad guy in the Galaxy).

While you take the risk indeed, by reaping the benefits of saving the hostages and defusing the situation at hand, but letting the bad guy go loose, and do alot more bad stuff you may or may not hear about in the future (which is up to BioWare, in whom you apparently have faith, that they won't punish the righteous...).

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 06 novembre 2010 - 03:07 .

[Xilizhra]

Actually, by heading into this situation at all, you're risking your life against something that's not Reaper-related and thus jeopardizing all life in the galaxy unnecessarily.

[Zulu_DFA]

And what does this have to do with it at all?



Besides, I don't think Shepard is that critical to saving the Galaxy. Yes, he's good, a valuable asset and all, but in the end of the day, kill him and ten new super-heroes will come off a bus.

[Xilizhra]

I mean that you're taking an acceptable risk by going up against Balak. You don't play things wholly safe all the time; you can't.

[Razor_Zeng]

Ieldra2 wrote...
Of course leaving the Council to die will result *only* in being hated by aliens without any benefit to be gained by the now all-human Council.

I personally feel there should have been three options to the ME1 Council decision.

1. Help the Council, protect them. - Paragon

2. Attack Soverign with everything, he is the biggest thread, lets hope the Council survive - Neutral

3. Screw the Alien's Kill Soverign. - Renegade.

And with 2 depending on where your character is on the Paragon/Renegade scale the Council either lives or dies. If they live you get the Current Paragon ending. If they die an All new Alien led Council is chosen. This would all you to not tweak your mustasche and laugh maniacially like a soap opera villian like the full on Renegade ending does.

[Zulu_DFA]

Xilizhra wrote...

I mean that you're taking an acceptable risk by going up against Balak. You don't play things wholly safe all the time; you can't.

No doubt. But when it comes to the decision whether to save the hostages or kill the bad guy, I take the less risky (for the Galaxy anyway) choice of the two.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 06 novembre 2010 - 03:20 .

[Xilizhra]

I suppose we just have different styles, then. Galactic history will decide which of us will be remembered better.

[Zulu_DFA]

Xilizhra wrote...

I suppose we just have different styles, then. Galactic history will decide which of us will be remembered better.

Figured as much you'd care about such a thing.

Ever heard the expressions Herostratic Fame and Unknown Soldier?

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 06 novembre 2010 - 03:45 .

[Xilizhra]

I do not, in point of fact, care about such a thing. I was more referring to the fact that my actions have so far produced better outcomes than yours, and I suspect that this situation will be no different.

[davidt0504]

no I disagree, my main playthrough I ignore the color choices and just pick the choice that I would do in real life.

[Zulu_DFA]

Xilizhra wrote...

I do not, in point of fact, care about such a thing. I was more referring to the fact that my actions have so far produced better outcomes than yours, and I suspect that this situation will be no different.

No, my actions produced better result so far.

My Galaxy is much more predictable place than yours, but not as stagnant as it used to be before the force of progress (aka Mankind) started calling the major shots.

Modifié par Zulu_DFA, 06 novembre 2010 - 03:54 .

[Xilizhra]

As far as I can tell, your galaxy is a place of increased hostilities and no extra anti-Reaper help, which is really no surprise. Also, more people are alive in mine.

[Nightwriter]

I'm not sure I understand...

Is the OP asking if things would be different if the paragon and renegade choices were arranged differently on the dialogue wheel, or if things would be different if they didn't morally polarize paragon and renegade so much?

'Splain. 'Splain to me.

[SimonTheFrog]

What about if we throw all paragade threads into one big one.

It seems nobody is really happy about the paragon-renegade axis or how it's implemented into the game. And all i see are discussions about the different aspects of the same issue. Why not merge them?! Then people wouldn't have to post their ideas into 4 or 5 different threads... webspace is a rare commodity, you know

[Pacifien]

I understand the theory behind the location/color of the paragon/renegade system, as it is a bit part in making it easy for people to choose which part of the dialogue wheel will convey the person's intent. Unfortunately, the intentions of a paragon and renegade vary within themselves. Sometimes a paragon is being compassionate. Sometimes they are being lawful. Those are not intricately tied to each other. Nor are the renegade decisions that are pragmatic versus selfish.

Also, with the way the persuasion check system works in ME2, people feel they will be punished if they don't gather the appropriate paragon/renegade points to meet a check later on. Having an option greyed out simply is rubbing it in the player's face that they are missing content because of how they played the game. No one likes to feel punished for how they played the game.

I suppose Alpha Protocol and DA2 are learning from the ME system and going less with the black and white scenario and deciding a simple dialogue wheel needs to convey intent more than where it lies on a morality system.

I don't like the paragon/renegade system. I think it's a relic of the light side/dark side system from Knights of the Old Republic. I don't think that paragon/renegade choices made early in the game should have any bearing on whether you'll be able to make similar decisions in the future. I also think intent needs to be conveyed better than simply paragon versus renegade unless the developers clearly define what makes something paragon versus renegade. Perhaps you could have multiple paragon methods of progressing through the dialogue. In some cases in ME2, you do, but then some have the nice blue color that indicates you are going to get more points than if you took the other option. And everyone knows picking the colored version will lead to more awesome.

[GracefulChicken]

Renegades make the galaxy safer than Paragons do, I dont see how you could even argue the opposite. Paragons often let perps go, because its idealistic and nicer, and thats apparently what constitutes a paragon. Renegades actually kill criminals, leaving the galaxy better off. Even if some hostages die (BDTS), they have no effect on the galaxy that we're aware of. Them living doesnt help at all, beyond their familys and friends being happy (which doesnt make the galaxy better or safer, just less sad, and even then by a totally negliable amount). Whereas killing a terrorist who can seriously **** up alot of people's lives actually makes things safer in a quantifiable amount, an amount that actually makes a difference. I agree 100% with what Zulu was saying.

[Xilizhra]

It remains to be seen if killing Balak actually makes the galaxy safer. We can tell that killing the rachni queen, the Feros colonists, the Council, etc. did not.

[Dean_the_Young]

The Rachni Queen wasn't something you had good reason to believe beforehand. The Feros colony did neither. The Council decision hasn't harmed the galaxy.



Don't attribute tone and hindsight to wisdom and foresight.

[SimonTheFrog]

GracefulChicken wrote...

Renegades make the galaxy safer than Paragons do, I dont see how you could even argue the opposite.  

*sigh*

You DO realize that this is fiction, right?
There are no real consequences to our actions, only made up stuff. The writers are being inspired by stuff that happens in real world which makes thinking in real-world patterns appear plausible. But it's not. This is NOT the real world. The writers are free to come up with twists and turns as they please and they have shown that they are willing to use that freedom in the past.
So, please stop arguing about such nonsense like "the safety of the galaxy". This is so silly its not even funny. All actors in the game are there for dramatic effect, not as an indicator for travel-safety based on your actions. This is not a crime-sim!!! 
So, pick the choice you like at the time and forget about the so called consequences...

[Xilizhra]

Either way, however, I've saved and improved lives by my actions, along with saving the galaxy. I'm very happy with them and with my moral compass.

[Chuvvy]

I think bioware needs to learn how to do grey better. They try but for the most part it's black and white. It would be better if there weren't paragon/renegade though. Also it doesn't help that renegade always gets negative consequences and paragons always get positive ones.

Modifié par Slidell505, 06 novembre 2010 - 05:38 .