71 réponses à ce sujet

[BringerOfChaos]

 My paragon/renegade are currently pretty equal, and for what ever reason some of the P/R options are being blacked out.

I'd heard something like this before, but I never thought it was like this. 
I usually go with what I think is right in that situation. I'd rather do that any day then knock over a Turian's drink and then I'm suddenly THE EVIL MALICIOUS RENEGADE SUPERLY EVIL POWER OMEGA BADASS MAN.



In short--WHY?

[marshalleck]

Because Bioware still don't have a grip on how it should work.

[Annihilator27]

Your Paragon/Renegade isnt high enough.

[Cru Hunter]

At least they give you a choice on what to do Yep, some of their dialogue options need work. A lot of people were angry at the dialogue options for Shepard when he talks to Ashley/Kaidan.

[BringerOfChaos]

annihilator27 wrote...

Your Paragon/Renegade isnt high enough.

Obviously.

Your just super ****ed if you don't go full in one direction.

[Dr. Explosion]

Actually I think it's 'cuz the options don't check for your current REN / PARA score, they check for what it should be.

Rather than explain it, (poorly), here, Imma link you to the ME wiki:

Go here to learn why the system is buggered

it's at the bottom of the page, under the Supplemental Notes headings

Modifié par Conall Cameron, 22 janvier 2011 - 04:13 .

[Dr. Megaverse]

It is a bit of a pain, especially if you, like me, try to go with whats appropriate for the situation...but the other option is you could just not play.

[didymos1120]

BringerOfChaos wrote...

annihilator27 wrote...

Your Paragon/Renegade isnt high enough.

Obviously.

Well, then why'd you ask why it was happening if you already knew the answer?  Or did you want to know why that's how the system works?  Well, then here's another obvious answer: because that's how they designed the persuasion system. 

[xentar]

didymos1120 wrote...

BringerOfChaos wrote...

annihilator27 wrote...

Your Paragon/Renegade isnt high enough.

Obviously.

Well, then why'd you ask why it was happening if you already knew the answer?  Or did you want to know why that's how the system works?  Well, then here's another obvious answer: because that's how they designed the persuasion system. 

Now, you do know what the next logical question should be, right?

[AdamNW]

The pursuasion system takes the % of points you have for a given morality out of the total up to that point in the game to determine if you can do the charm/intimidate check.  For example, if you needed 30% to do a charm check and had 25 out of 100 paragon, you woulnd't be able to do the charm option.

I like the system personally, but it could be better (specifically, being able to fail charm/intimidate). I think that the people who whine about it don't understand video game morality in general.

Modifié par AdamNW, 22 janvier 2011 - 04:43 .

[didymos1120]

xentar wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

BringerOfChaos wrote...

annihilator27 wrote...

Your Paragon/Renegade isnt high enough.

Obviously.

Well, then why'd you ask why it was happening if you already knew the answer?  Or did you want to know why that's how the system works?  Well, then here's another obvious answer: because that's how they designed the persuasion system. 

Now, you do know what the next logical question should be, right?

Yes.  And the answer to that would be:  "Ask the devs.  Good luck with that.  Let us know if you find anything out."

[Manic Sheep]

Because when bioware streamlined everything they took out spending points to raise charm or intimidate and made it dependent on paragon and renegade points,  scale with how many points have been available to you and made you lose all your points on a newgame +.
IMO it was a stupid idea because it forces you to play a certain way and stick with one or the other to avoid nerfing you character and limits how you can roleplay any character. For a game that is supposedly all about choice is one of the worst things you could do.

Nothing we can do about it however if you’re on pc use the save editor to up your points when you get stuck, farm points or just live with having less than ideal outcomes.

Hopefully they separate conversation from para/ren points in ME3... well actually I’m kind of hoping they ditch the whole system completely because I think it encourages people to turn their brains off and just pick the blue or red line but I don’t see that happening.

Modifié par Manic Sheep, 22 janvier 2011 - 05:22 .

[Joram Talid]

personally, i like the system. you can only use the cool renegade/paragon choice if you are a total renegade/paragon.



it sounds like someone(OP) wants to have his cake and eat it too.

[Tony Gunslinger]

Manic Sheep wrote...
Because when bioware streamlined everything they took out spending points to raise charm or intimidate and made it dependent on paragon and renegade points,  scale with how many points have been available to you and made you lose all your points on a newgame +.
IMO it was a stupid idea because it forces you to play a certain way and stick with one or the other to avoid nerfing you character and limits how you can roleplay any character. For a game that is supposedly all about choice is one of the worst things you could do.

I think ME2 is all about consequences.

Manic Sheep wrote...
Hopefully they separate conversation from para/ren points in ME3... well actually I’m kind of hoping they ditch the whole system completely because I think it encourages people to turn their brains off and just pick the blue or red line but I don’t see that happening.

Why don't you see that happening in the next game?

Modifié par Tony Gunslinger, 22 janvier 2011 - 05:52 .

[wizardryforever]

Oh look, it's this topic again. Sigh.



The game rewards dedicated characters with special dialogue that only a particularly kind soul or ruthless badass would be able to use with any effectiveness. As such, if your character is wishy-washy, indecisive, schizophrenic or some combination of these, you don't get to take these options. It makes sense, as the game judges your morality as being a composite of your choices up to that point in the game. And really for most of these options, I don't see a neutral character pulling them off very well. The Charm options are hyper-Paragon, and the Intimidate options are hyper-Renegade. It only makes sense for dedicated Paragons and Renegades to get access to them.

[xentar]

You could be a very convinced and outspoken revolutionary type, a ruthless idealist, and those types can be very charismatic. Yet, in the game this could give you close to 50/50 scores and at best shut you off half of the options at some point if you lean to one side or the other.



Hopefully, all the forum whining will help. There's just too much of it to ignore unless it's intentional.

[The Smoking Man]

wizardryforever wrote...

Oh look, it's this topic again. Sigh.

The game rewards dedicated characters with special dialogue that only a particularly kind soul or ruthless badass would be able to use with any effectiveness. As such, if your character is wishy-washy, indecisive, schizophrenic or some combination of these, you don't get to take these options. It makes sense, as the game judges your morality as being a composite of your choices up to that point in the game. And really for most of these options, I don't see a neutral character pulling them off very well. The Charm options are hyper-Paragon, and the Intimidate options are hyper-Renegade. It only makes sense for dedicated Paragons and Renegades to get access to them.

AKA shoehorning the player into always picking the top right or bottom right option. They might as well just ask you "which alignment would you like?" at the beginning of the game, and then the dialogue choices are all automated from that point on depending on if you picked Paragon or Renegade. The whole thing just undermines the supposed "roleplaying" aspect of the game even further. The only way to make a more than one-dimensional character is to vary, at least somewhat, with your dialogue choices, but doing this punishes you in ME2, which is the problem. If you take various options, you can, in fact, just as easily be coherent with it as much as you can be ridiculously incoherent.

Modifié par The Smoking Man, 22 janvier 2011 - 06:15 .

[wizardryforever]

The Smoking Man wrote...

wizardryforever wrote...

Oh look, it's this topic again. Sigh.

The game rewards dedicated characters with special dialogue that only a particularly kind soul or ruthless badass would be able to use with any effectiveness. As such, if your character is wishy-washy, indecisive, schizophrenic or some combination of these, you don't get to take these options. It makes sense, as the game judges your morality as being a composite of your choices up to that point in the game. And really for most of these options, I don't see a neutral character pulling them off very well. The Charm options are hyper-Paragon, and the Intimidate options are hyper-Renegade. It only makes sense for dedicated Paragons and Renegades to get access to them.

AKA shoehorning the player into always picking the top right or top left option. They might as well just ask you "which alignment would you like?" at the beginning of the game, and then the dialogue choices are all automated from that point on depending on if you picked Paragon or Renegade.

Hardly.  You can resolve every situation by picking the white options.  At no point in the game are you forced to choose Charm or Intimidate.  Maybe if you want a certain outcome, then yeah, but that is metagaming.  Your actions influence who your character is.  You can't be a ruthless jerkass and then convince someone to stop fighting by appealing to their compassion.  Your words would have no weight.  They'd likely scoff at you, "you're one to talk!"

I think the system is fine the way it is, rewarding dedicated players while not penalizing neutrals.  They should just give a better explanation as to the way it works up front, to avoid all the confusion about the points and such.

[Dreggon]

Joram Talid wrote...

personally, i like the system. you can only use the cool renegade/paragon choice if you are a total renegade/paragon.

it sounds like someone(OP) wants to have his cake and eat it too.

If you have a cake, why shouldn't you be allowed to eat it? You have it, after all.

[Inquisitor Recon]

Dreggon wrote...
If you have a cake, why shouldn't you be allowed to eat it? You have it, after all.

Exactly, why would I have the cake if I was not going to eat it?

[shnizzler93]

ReconTeam wrote...

Dreggon wrote...
If you have a cake, why shouldn't you be allowed to eat it? You have it, after all.

Exactly, why would I have the cake if I was not going to eat it?

Because the cake is a lie.

[Mr Zoat]

I'd prefer it if persuasion worked off the morality total. That would make more sense, right? Give paragades a chance to do mid level nice stuff? Or maybe just have the top right option get better depending on your paragon score.

[xentar]

Mr Zoat wrote...

I'd prefer it if persuasion worked off the morality total. That would make more sense, right? Give paragades a chance to do mid level nice stuff? Or maybe just have the top right option get better depending on your paragon score.

Not necessarily. That would screw people who like middle-right options out of persuasion. I see no better alternative diplomatic system than skill(s) for now. Or, if having no persuasion skills is a matter of religion - something Alpha Protocol-styled when you have all options available but not all of them work.

[Manic Sheep]

Tony Gunslinger wrote...


Why don't you see that happening in the next game?

No real reason, just because it’s been a big thing in both games and while I don’t like the system some people do. I don't expect the developers to make such a drastic change for the last game is all. They may do it; I just don’t expect them too.

Modifié par Manic Sheep, 22 janvier 2011 - 10:48 .

[Lumikki]

Oh this topic again, one of my favor arguments.



Paragon/renegade system was too limited. How ever, persuation system was even worst.