150 réponses à ce sujet

[jbblue05]

Good video for Paragons and people who saved the Rachni

But its still biased

[Phaedon]

Congrats, Rio, this video sums everything up.

[Gabey5]

the rachni should be killed. A wizard made my race almost kill everything in the galaxy is not a defense. you had to options send it on its merry way or kill it right there. With the info shepard had, killing was the most obvious

[PauseforEffect]

RiouHotaru, good work with your video. While it is very considerate of you to catch people up, I think those who understand what you're arguing know the salient points of what's going on. Those who don't know what the Rachni are can always catch up in other sources. Would emphasize how Bioware defines Paragon/Renegade in both ME1 and ME2. The differences in their definitions between the two games show that they've been trying to accomodate the renegade decisions. If possible, let the dialogue take care of your narrating. Maybe offer different outcomes in different choices of dialogue. Keep it short, cut it to the essentials.

Well, there's my critique. Like what you're doing, keep it up.

[RiouHotaru]

PrimalEden wrote...

RiouHotaru, good work with your video. While it is very considerate of you to catch people up, I think those who understand what you're arguing know the salient points of what's going on. Those who don't know what the Rachni are can always catch up in other sources. Would emphasize how Bioware defines Paragon/Renegade in both ME1 and ME2. The differences in their definitions between the two games show that they've been trying to accomodate the renegade decisions. If possible, let the dialogue take care of your narrating. Maybe offer different outcomes in different choices of dialogue. Keep it short, cut it to the essentials.
Well, there's my critique. Like what you're doing, keep it up.

Okay, good point.  I suppose I just wanted to accomodate people who might not necessarily have the proper context.  The next video will likely be far more concise and to the point.  I'll still give some background info, as some context is always necessary so that anyone who isn't just a bioware fan knows what's going on.

[RiouHotaru]

jbblue05 wrote...

Good video for Paragons and people who saved the Rachni

But its still biased

The point of the video series is to show that Paragons don't always make choices because we're meta-gaming and we know they'll work out.  We do make these decisions based on rational and critical thinking.  Occasionally we are asked to make decisions with some leaps of faith, but there IS some logical backing to those leaps, so we're not closing our eyes and jumping in, proverbially speaking.

[jbblue05]

RiouHotaru wrote...

jbblue05 wrote...

Good video for Paragons and people who saved the Rachni

But its still biased

The point of the video series is to show that Paragons don't always make choices because we're meta-gaming and we know they'll work out.  We do make these decisions based on rational and critical thinking.  Occasionally we are asked to make decisions with some leaps of faith, but there IS some logical backing to those leaps, so we're not closing our eyes and jumping in, proverbially speaking.

Sparing the Rachni in ME1 had zero logic,  People spared them because of a leap of faith or "to not commit genocide" Paragons just look smarter because of the events in ME2.

You didn't know  anything about the Reaper armarda and that you need to build an army in ME1

You didn't know anything about Sovereign indoctrinating the Rachni until ME2. 

BTW I don't completely believe the Queen's story.  I think the Rachni started the war on their own free will but Sovereign indoctrinated them when the Rachni were going to retreat once they started losing.

I don't want the Paragons to be drastically punished by having the Rachni become evil because noone will spare the Rachni.

 As a Renegade I just want Bioware to put in some shades of Gray. because based off of ME2 Bioware is just making them look innocent, super-nice and very helpful..In ME3 and the Epilogue I want to see the Negatives of the decision.

Besides cutting content for Renegades Bioware could've had an unstable Peak 15 scientist yell at Shepard for commiting "genocide.

If Bioware can have a random Asari send SHepard a message on Illium. I don't see why they couldn't have a random person  speak those who killed the Queen.

[PauseforEffect]

Ah, context. Thank you for clarifying, RiouHotaru.

People want extra attention for what is no matter how it's justified, murder? Should we also add in shooting little children for more "real life" choices? It does happen to actual soldiers with no reward for that

[Aigyl]

Excellent video, slightly biased due to the very nature and purpose of said video (give overview of both Paragon and Renegade choices, defend the Paragon's reasoning), but I enjoyed it all the same. Looking forward to the next one.

[Kasen]

Great video. I certainly don't think it's any more biased than the overzealous Renegades around here. It's nice to see an articulate defense of Paragon decision making.

[Inquisitor Recon]

Overzealous renegades? I hope your bug friends turn on you. If there is one thing I know, its that giant space bugs cannot be trusted.

[Kasen]

ReconTeam wrote...

Overzealous renegades? I hope your bug friends turn on you. If there is one thing I know, its that giant space bugs cannot be trusted.

And hence my point...

[Vaenier]

ReconTeam wrote...

Overzealous renegades? I hope your bug friends turn on you. If there is one thing I know, its that giant space bugs cannot be trusted.

Nothing like admitted speciesism. ^.=.^

[Inquisitor Recon]

Better overzealous than over-trusting.

[szkasypcze]

Enogh of talking. Just should the bastards.....

[Inquisitor Recon]

Vaenier wrote...
Nothing like admitted speciesism. ^.=.^

I'll admit I have a thing against giant space bugs. I just can't help myself. Even when I see keepers my thought is "Where is my flamethrower?"

[Lunatic LK47]

Weskerr wrote...
I did as you suggested and cyclyed through all the dialogue. Avina never says anything about the Rachni attempting to communicate - or not attempting to communicate.

I reviewed the scene again and you are correct in this department, but all it said is "Rachni started attacking Council Races after explorer team opened a relay leading to their systems." Uh, why exactly did the Rachni do that when it was perfectly minding its own business? Why try to conquer the Council Worlds by force after their relay was open? All we knew about them is that they were territoria and stopped therel. It's as unreasonable as saying "It's perfectly fine for a pack of African lions to kill all of Earth's human inhabitants just because a few human explorers visited their territory."

[Dave of Canada]

I'd consider myself a Renegade, just to throw that out there before I continue. This is just a mindless rant about my dislike of Paragon / Renegade and I hope it makes sense by the end of it because I'm in a rush.

*slightly-ontopic post*

I dislike how the writers can't make up their own mind. I don't mean to insult them but constantly must we suffer from their inability to decide what is or isn't a Renegade. For example, the "bottom" option often means you're insulting people but for some reason when I'm dealing with TIM I'm kissing his ass? That was odd.

There's also the whole problem with speciests, being an ****, taking stuff being considered renegade actions when they should simply be a choice involved in Shepard's personality instead of something that should be considered "Renegade". Why should telling somebody "Move aside" be considered Renegade when the Paragon option is "Please get out of the way"?

Then there's the whole matter about extra content, Paragons recieved bonus content and important choices impacted things in Mass Effect 2. What did a Renegade recieve? They recieved almost an identical playthrough to the default, my "choices" didn't mean anything. A Paragon who always picks the top option will recieve new stuff, meet people and always have things go their way.

Here's a rather poor analogy:
Two children are playing, one prefers playing football and the other prefers playing basketball.

The teacher comes out and gives the kid playing football a bunch of cookies because he's playing football, the kid playing basketball gets nothing.

How is the basketball kid supposed to feel? Cheated. That's how I felt with Renegade. How come Renegade can't get cameos for themselves, such as Liz Bayham and such? Couldn't they have recieved anything special that differs them from the blank-slate default Shepard?

Hell, on another point, how come Paragons will always have things go their way? I mean, when I did the Zaeed mission on my Paragon and said "Screw loyalty" to save the workers - I was fully expecting Zaeed to not be loyal to me after the mission, however they had the option to point a gun at Zaeed's head and make him loyal. How does that make sense? Shouldn't the Paragon sacrifice the mission, loyalty and such to not compromise your morals?

The Paragon, if he wants to follow his morals, they should suffer from it. I wouldn't trust or love Shepard if he backstabbed me to save a bunch of workers and threw 20 years of my life away, nor would I after he points a gun at my head and says "Let's work together lol :D". The Renegade throws away his morals to complete the mission, why should the Paragon still achieve said mission completion with their morals still intack? Is that not unfair for the player who did the "hard" decision?

If that wasn't enough of a problem, the writing often goes out of the way to make sure the Renegade feels bad about themselves for doing the "wrong" decision. Collector Base being the prime example where half your companions support keeping it, though if you do actually keep it they suddenly turn against you and call you an idiot for keeping the base. Though if you blow it up, everybody loves you and applauds your decision.

Should it not remain ambigous? Was it really necessary to tell Renegades "you screwed up" and "you're stupid", while also foreshadowing that you're going to get backstabbed later? Was it also necessary to tell Paragons they are amazing, they did the right thing and have everybody kiss the ground they walk on?

I'm also afraid it's this very behavior that makes it so there's a thousand and two Paragon loyalists on these forums. Here's an interesting question, if the game remained true to it's morals and balanced everything amongst each "morality" do you suspect there would be more Renegades on the forums? I suspect so greatly, as most debates roughly drown out to eventually using the writing to explain why they did the decision.

[Vaenier]

^ Your rant was very true, and I am a 75% Paragon player. Ignoring the stupid area of getting points for having manners, I pick what i feel are the smart options, or options as close to smart as possible in this stupid system. I saved the Rachni and saved the collector base, not for the reasons the games assumes and yells at me for though. I doubt this will change though sadly.

Modifié par Vaenier, 14 décembre 2010 - 10:18 .

[RiouHotaru]

@Dave of Canada: I understand your position, but I don't quite think your analogy worked. If the Renegade is capable of completing missions, securing loyalty, etc, etc, even though they take the more quick and dirty route, why shouldn't Paragons be able to achieve the same things taking a more difficult route. This is one of the problems with the "balancing act" that Bioware is trying for. By making outcomes relatively equal, it does feel that one side or the other is doing more or less work to get roughly the same outcome.



And the Collector Base writing is a good point, one I intend to bring up when I get to that part of the series.



@jbblue05: Defending the Paragon reasoning is the entire point of the series. It's only biased in that I defend the Paragon reasoning, since the Renegade reasoning for decision never gets the same amount of heat as the Paragon reasoning does.

[Dave of Canada]

RiouHotaru wrote...

why shouldn't Paragons be able to achieve the same things taking a more difficult route.

Because a Paragon supports their ideals and such, they enforce them on other people and would sacrifice the mission to not breach their ideals. It's just fortunate enough that their mission is completed anyways even though were going to abandon it for Paragonism.

It shouldn't be like this every single time, Paragon ideals should cost them. Zaeed shouldn't befriend Paragon Shepard because Shepard was able to say a few kind words, you went there and sacrificed Zaeed's mission but still completed your own.

One cannot be idealistic and right all the time, else there is no such thing as tough decisions. Both sides should recieve punishment for their decisions (and it's looking like we Renegades are going to suffer in ME3 by having nobody WANTING to help us and having less allies in general), though it's currently vary biased towards the Paragon getting everything.

It also doesn't help that most Paragons on this forum want the happily-ever-after ending where nobody suffers from their decisions and everybody loves each other.

Modifié par Dave of Canada, 14 décembre 2010 - 11:05 .

[Lunatic LK47]

Dave of Canada wrote...

One cannot be idealistic and right all the time, else there is no such thing as tough decisions. Both sides should recieve punishment for their decisions (and it's looking like we Renegades are going to suffer in ME3 by having nobody WANTING to help us and having less allies in general), though it's currently vary biased towards the Paragon getting everything.

It also doesn't help that most Paragons on this forum want the happily-ever-after ending where nobody suffers from their decisions and everybody loves each other.

Problem I had with Fallout 3 was for all of its "tough consequences" it devolved into "Keep the status quo, or don't bother at all." All it did was just make me like the game less and less. I am not interested in having the same **** in Mass Effect.

[Aigyl]

Dave of Canada wrote...

RiouHotaru wrote...

why shouldn't Paragons be able to achieve the same things taking a more difficult route.

Because a Paragon supports their ideals and such, they enforce them on other people and would sacrifice the mission to not breach their ideals. It's just fortunate enough that their mission is completed anyways even though were going to abandon it for Paragonism.

It shouldn't be like this every single time, Paragon ideals should cost them. Zaeed shouldn't befriend Paragon Shepard because Shepard was able to say a few kind words, you went there and sacrificed Zaeed's mission but still completed your own.

One cannot be idealistic and right all the time, else there is no such thing as tough decisions. Both sides should recieve punishment for their decisions (and it's looking like we Renegades are going to suffer in ME3 by having nobody WANTING to help us and having less allies in general), though it's currently vary biased towards the Paragon getting everything.

For the sake of t'ings I'd class myself a Paragon, with the occasional bottom right or Renegade choice (eg. telling the Council to shove it when they offer Spectre status again).

I definitely see your point on Zaeed's mission, but the trouble is that Loyalty is a game mechanic that determines how well you do in the Suicide Mission. If you made it so that it was impossible for Paragon players to activate Zaeed's Loyalty, it would make the whole mission almost completely pointless for them. You'd be punishing Paragon players' story decision with a gameplay alteration, a slippery slope that Bioware hasn't implemented in Mass Effect. How would you feel if telling Kasumi to destroy the Greybox, losing her love a second time all over again, would cost you her Loyalty? It would suck, the game would basically be saying that you made the wrong decision and is going to punish you even though you have good reasons to destroy that Greybox, go back and reload. To punish people for making a story decision, especially in a game with a morality system, I don't think is good design, it would just encourage meta-gaming and would annoy people that they're being screwed over gameplay-wise for a story-based choice.

On the Collector Base reaction I completely agree. Having every squadmate congratulate you for blowing it up and every squadmate complain that you kept it annoyed the heck out of me when I discovered it in my Renegade run (especially that squadmate that told you to keep the Base who was temporarily suffering from a split-personality disorder).

On Renegades being dis-advantaged though I disagree. Collector Base is one of the two biggest decisions in Mass Effect so far, if you kept it that Reaper tech will change things and odds are it will have a major impact in the Final Battle. You'll still be able to convince all the races to fight for you one way or another, the only major differences I can think of is that Paragons get the Rachni and Renegades get the Collector Base tech (and both decisions have the potential to be double-edged swords on their consequences).

It also doesn't help that most Paragons on this forum want
the happily-ever-after ending where nobody suffers from their decisions
and everybody loves each other.

I don't know if most Paragons want that, but I would certainly want some sort of shades of grey in the game's epilogue. A 100% happy ending would bug me.

[RiouHotaru]

I would mind if there was a 100% happy ending, but only if you make it difficult to achieve. Make the players Earn Your Happy Ending, as it were.



Also, I'm working on my second video as we speak. Got the audio recorded, and working on the clip editting, will either be up my late tonight or early tomorrow folks!

[RiouHotaru]

Second video AHOOOYYY!