99 réponses à ce sujet

[AdmiralCheez]

thatguy212 wrote...

i think the desire to have paragons screw themselves over is more because i remember alot of paragons saying how killing the rachni queen or keeping the base was going to screw renegades over, so i guess some want a status quo kinda effect, i personal would love it if all my renegades choices ended badly for me, makes me have to work harder to fix them.

Actually, most of the threads I've seen have said that destroying the base would end badly, which is fine.  I personally believe that both paragons and renegades are valid and equal, and should be kept that way.  I'm okay with each major decision having both positive and negative consequences.  For example, if you keep the base, you gain valuable technology, but TIM goes on a power trip.  If you destroy it, no new weapon for you, but Cerberus is less of a threat.  Same thing with the rachni: kill, and no reinforcements for you.  Keep, and while you have bonus shock troopers, you have to convince everyone that the rachni are the good guys.

[AdmiralCheez]

Kristofer1 wrote...

I wouldnt mind seeing a paragon choice have negative effects. that would definitely be an interesting twist. however i would like some decision that appeared to be minor turn out to be a major influencer. that would be cool

That would be awesome.  Like I said in my previous post, I prefer that renegade and paragon remain equally valid paths.

[AkiKishi]

Kristofer1 wrote...

I wouldnt mind seeing a paragon choice have negative effects. that would definitely be an interesting twist. however i would like some decision that appeared to be minor turn out to be a major influencer. that would be cool

They do let me give you 2 quick examples.

1. You let Enora go and later find out she's a psychopath.
2. You find the evidence for Pitney smuggling and turn it in to the cops for 4k (you get 9k if you give it to him).

There are lots of minor things, I'm not sure what people are expecting like something that makes the game unfinishable if you choose the wrong path? Not going to happen.

Money is tight in ME2 (if your not on NGP or import) so that extra 5k can have some real impact.

Modifié par BobSmith101, 05 février 2011 - 07:42 .

[CroGamer002]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Kristofer1 wrote...

I
wouldnt mind seeing a paragon choice have negative effects. that would
definitely be an interesting twist. however i would like some decision
that appeared to be minor turn out to be a major influencer. that would
be cool

That would be awesome.  Like I said in my previous post, I prefer that renegade and paragon remain equally valid paths.

Same here.

Modifié par Mesina2, 05 février 2011 - 07:41 .

[rma2110]

At least two fights are made easier though renegade decision. Tarak's gunship won't be fully repaired if you renegade the mechanic. Plus, blowing up that Krogan in Modrin's LM is bound to make it easier. Having to listen to that entire speech is punishing the paragons enough as it is.

I'm with you Admiral. I don't see how renegades get the short end of the stick.

Modifié par rma2110, 05 février 2011 - 07:44 .

[AkiKishi]

Ericzio wrote...

I get renegade +5 even if i gave the evidence to the cop, glitch maybe? idk

For some reason you get 5 renegade points every time you don't immediately leave an area. Not sure what the logic is but I tested it in several places.

Mordins mission
Mordins loyalty mission - btw there is an extra 3k if you don't leave.
Samara's mission

[The Elite Elite]

lol, nice one OP. Yeah, there are too many people who seem to have some a problem with others who decided to make different choices for some reason. "Bah, I hope all you renegades get screwed by having everyone in Cerberus become indoctrinated because you kept the CB." "I hope Paragons get screwed out of some vital knowledge needed to defeat the Reapers because they destroyed the CB."

[AdmiralCheez]

The Elite Elite wrote...

lol, nice one OP. Yeah, there are too many people who seem to have some a problem with others who decided to make different choices for some reason. "Bah, I hope all you renegades get screwed by having everyone in Cerberus become indoctrinated because you kept the CB." "I hope Paragons get screwed out of some vital knowledge needed to defeat the Reapers because they destroyed the CB."

Should I do a "paragons are persecuted" thread, too, just to be fair? :3  I'd need more examples of paragon whining, though.

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 05 février 2011 - 07:46 .

[Moiaussi]

Yes, Renegades are persecuted. They are also often prosecuted. That is because the rest of the population are usually less apt to be sacrificed in the name of universal salvation than the renegades are ready to volenteer everyone other than themselves.



That said, sparing the feros survivors might still bite paragons. BW has given us two chances to deal with them now, with extra warning signs the second time round (Shiala turning green). It is too bad there wasn't a paragon means of getting them to take the more invasive tests...... i.e pointing out that the skin color change and other issues they are facing aren't normal, and that if normal tests aren't finding anything, maybe the more invasive tests are needed.

[The Elite Elite]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

The Elite Elite wrote...

lol, nice one OP. Yeah, there are too many people who seem to have some a problem with others who decided to make different choices for some reason. "Bah, I hope all you renegades get screwed by having everyone in Cerberus become indoctrinated because you kept the CB." "I hope Paragons get screwed out of some vital knowledge needed to defeat the Reapers because they destroyed the CB."

Should I do a "paragons are persecuted" thread, too, just to be fair? :3  I'd need more examples of paragon whining, though.

Not a bad idea. At the moment I can't think of any more examples of paragon whining that I've seen. Usually it's only the one for the CB that I see.

[Dean_the_Young]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

]If your point is reducto ad absurdum, your point is perfectly good. It's just reducto ad absurdum, and shouldn't be taken seriously.

If your point is that those are the actual complaints and positions people have, you're just misleading.

Yeah, it is a reducto, but I have seen people complain about how renegades are never rewarded while paragons are put on a pedestal.  The lack of NPCs is a big one, and the desire to watch the paragons screw themselves over is another.

Here's the question I have as to NPC's: why are the returning NPC's that reflect most the story-mission choices (as opposed to the side-mission choices) from ME1 only the ones you can kill? In some cases it's perfectly relevant (Rana's reappearance on Grunt's Loyalty Mission), but in most cases there's no reason why the character you could kill has to be the one who comes back. It's not a matter of 'new and better' characters, but why is there only only one character in the first place? If the point of story-mission choice return characters is coherency, why is it limited to Paragon lines?

Take three examples on Illium: the Rachni ambassador, Shiala, and Giana. What do these charaters have in common? They were all reflective of story-related characters you couldn't avoid affecting. No matter how you got your garage pass, you affected Giana. The Rachni and Shiala choices were unavoidable binary choices.

Their appearance on Illium isn't critical to the plot. It's flavoring, a throwback to ME1 choices, story coherence. The point of their appearance isn't to advance the plot, but to tie ME2 back to ME1 for the players.

But why are the killable characters required for that?

Shiala wasn't the only colonist-person on Feros with a name and a voice actor. We had Jong, if he survived, who's working for the good of the colony. We had a number of named colonists with identities and, god forbid, characterization. We even had Elizabeth, who had a similar basis for guilt towards the Colonists as Shiala and espoused a similar desire to help them, and unlike Shiala and Jong and all the colonists, Elizabeth couldn't be killed.

So why is the link to Feros either a nameless colonist, or a Paragon-only reoccruing character? There wasn't a lack of Feros characters to choose from.


Likewise, Giana. Yes, you can kill her. But if you did, you know who didn't get killed or silenced? Who would also have a basis for doing buisness/having some sort of concern that would bring them to Illium? Lorik Quin. The Turian who picks up the pieces and comes out on top if Giana gets killed. There's no reason that only Paragons (or, at least, non-Renegade choices) can have a reappearing character.


This still carries over to the Rachni Ambassador. What was her role in ME2? Did she give items? Did she even give a side mission? Did she in any way advance the plot?

No. Her one, and only, role was as a character (not even a reoccuring character!) that reminded us of our last choice.

Which was nice, but why is there only a Paragon reflection? If we're having a randon NPC stand around to thank us for what we did, why not a random Krogan, or some Noveria executive, thank us for killing the Rachni, and allude to the galactic political **** storm that might have occured had we not?


Paragon-return characters are very annoying because there's no real reason that only Paragons can get a return character, especially in regards to story-choices when the selection of a killable return character occurs from a cast of characters who don't necessitate a Paragon/Renegade action to be brought back.

It's easy to say 'of course a Renegade wouldn't see a return, they killed them,' but there's no reason the killable characters must be the ones returning.

[Barquiel]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

It's easy to say 'of course a Renegade wouldn't see a return, they killed them,' but there's no reason the killable characters must be the ones returning.

I think the reason is that they are fan favorites.

Gianna, Shiala or Conrad Verner are pretty popular.
Anoleis or Jeong...not so much

Modifié par Barquiel, 05 février 2011 - 08:09 .

[AdmiralCheez]

@Dean: I agree that there really is no reason for people like Elizabeth and Lorik not to return. However, those little two-minute convos may be the only reward paragons get for sparing characters. For example, how is Fist going to help against the Reapers? How is Helena Blake?

As for the rachni queen, most people that saw it in person were dead anyway. Any character that said "thanks for killing the queen" would have seen more contrived than the mind-controlled asari.  If anything, that little cameo may have been BW's way of saying "we're holding the outcome of this decision off until ME3, doodz."

Modifié par AdmiralCheez, 05 février 2011 - 08:11 .

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

@Dean: I agree that there really is no reason for people like Elizabeth and Lorik not to return. However, those little two-minute convos may be the only reward paragons get for sparing characters. For example, how is Fist going to help against the Reapers? How is Helena Blake?

Things don't always need to be able to help or assist against the Reapers in some way, but seeing them again don't hurt. And when done correctly, helps adds some flavor.

[Dean_the_Young]

Barquiel wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

It's easy to say 'of course a Renegade wouldn't see a return, they killed them,' but there's no reason the killable characters must be the ones returning.

I think the reason is that they are fan favorites.

Gianna, Shiala or Conrad Verner are pretty popular.
Anoleis or Jeong...not so much

And they're fan-favorites because they returned and had more exposure and time to be appreciated. The cart is before the horse here.

Nor, again, is this an either-or. If Shiala survives, Shiala appears: if Shiala doesn't survive, Elizabeth appears. There's no reason it must be Shiala and only Shiala who's a return face. Same can apply to Giana and Lorik: if you helped Giana, Giana appears. If you didn't Lorik appears.

[Moiaussi]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Here's the question I have as to NPC's: why are the returning NPC's that reflect most the story-mission choices (as opposed to the side-mission choices) from ME1 only the ones you can kill? In some cases it's perfectly relevant (Rana's reappearance on Grunt's Loyalty Mission), but in most cases there's no reason why the character you could kill has to be the one who comes back. It's not a matter of 'new and better' characters, but why is there only only one character in the first place? If the point of story-mission choice return characters is coherency, why is it limited to Paragon lines?

Likely related to VA contracts... New NPCs would mean new contracts.

Other than that, which renegade choice regarding NPC's don't involve killing them? The consort returns if you helped her in ME1.... so there is one that isn't one you can kill.... who else though?

Modifié par Moiaussi, 05 février 2011 - 08:18 .

[AdmiralCheez]

Lizardviking wrote...

Things don't always need to be able to help or assist against the Reapers in some way, but seeing them again don't hurt. And when done correctly, helps adds some flavor.

That was the point I was trying to make, pretty much.  They're there for flavor.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

Things don't always need to be able to help or assist against the Reapers in some way, but seeing them again don't hurt. And when done correctly, helps adds some flavor.

That was the point I was trying to make, pretty much.  They're there for flavor.

Which just begs why paragon choices are in a bunch of cases the only thing that gives some flavour in ME2.

[CroGamer002]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

And they're fan-favorites because they returned and had more exposure and time to be appreciated. The cart is before the horse here.

Nor, again, is this an either-or. If Shiala survives, Shiala appears: if Shiala doesn't survive, Elizabeth appears. There's no reason it must be Shiala and only Shiala who's a return face. Same can apply to Giana and Lorik: if you helped Giana, Giana appears. If you didn't Lorik appears.

Why would Elizabeth come back?
She isn't infected by Thorian spores.
And why on Earth Lorik would be on Illium? He has company on Noveria!

[rma2110]

Lizardviking wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

Things don't always need to be able to help or assist against the Reapers in some way, but seeing them again don't hurt. And when done correctly, helps adds some flavor.

That was the point I was trying to make, pretty much.  They're there for flavor.

Which just begs why paragon choices are in a bunch of cases the only thing that gives some flavour in ME2.

Because paragon playthoughs are bland without the flavour of renegade dislouge and interupts. They needed a little extra.

Modifié par rma2110, 05 février 2011 - 08:25 .

[Dean_the_Young]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

@Dean: I agree that there really is no reason for people like Elizabeth and Lorik not to return. However, those little two-minute convos may be the only reward paragons get for sparing characters. For example, how is Fist going to help against the Reapers? How is Helena Blake?

What do the reapers have to do with it?

The point is continuity, not how it matters for the final battle. Renegades are just as entitled to continuity nods as the Paragons.


Helena Blake and Conrad are actually great examples of how character reoccurance should work: there's a paragon reoccurance (bugged as it is with Conrad, Helena is a charity worker), a Renegade reoccurance (Conrad ME2, Helena the Aria-lieutenant), and a non-reappearance (getting Conrad or Helena killed is possible by both Paragon and Renegade opportunities). Both characters avoid a 'you must be a Paragon OR kill them" setup which affects most the story-line reoccuring characters (Rachni Ambassador, Giana, Shiala, Thana).

As for the rachni queen, most people that saw it in person were dead anyway. Any character that said "thanks for killing the queen" would have seen more contrived than the mind-controlled asari.  If anything, that little cameo may have been BW's way of saying "we're holding the outcome of this decision off until ME3, doodz."

What does seeing it in person have to do with anything? The Ambassador asari wasn't on Noveria herself: she herself is contrived, but that doesn't make it bad. Random empty suit thanking you on behalf of Krogan/the Executive Board for stopping a galactic calamity is no more contrived than random empty head being saved by Rachni from space pirates and being sent to thank you for saving them.


The Rachni Queen's ambassador got a feather-bed tongue-bath treatment. If the Rachni don't come out as a good faction, I'll be the first to applaud (and certainly not be heard over the screams of anger and protests).

[mopotter]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Stupidus wrote...

No one's forcing you to be an ass in-game.

Actually, the point of the thread is that renegades are not persecuted.

I can't believe it I actually got that.  

[Dean_the_Young]

Mesina2 wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

And they're fan-favorites because they returned and had more exposure and time to be appreciated. The cart is before the horse here.

Nor, again, is this an either-or. If Shiala survives, Shiala appears: if Shiala doesn't survive, Elizabeth appears. There's no reason it must be Shiala and only Shiala who's a return face. Same can apply to Giana and Lorik: if you helped Giana, Giana appears. If you didn't Lorik appears.

Why would Elizabeth come back?
She isn't infected by Thorian spores.

To help the colonists.

Being infected by Thorian spores isn't a requirement for caring for the colonists, or for a ticket to Illium.

And why on Earth Lorik would be on Illium? He has company on Noveria!

Say it with me now: "Business Trip."

These things happen. It's an amazing universe, I know, to think that executives might travel around in the interest of their business, and not be locked to a desk and hardline telephone for all their business.