93 réponses à ce sujet

[Locutus_of_BORG]

I ever hand the evidence over.
I can fight and win w/o the Collector Base, but I can't live w/o my sweet Tali

    

:drools: :foamsatmouth: :dies:

Modifié par Locutus_of_BORG, 11 février 2011 - 07:29 .

[Moiaussi]

I take the 'rally the crowd' option, which wins the trial without need of purjury regarding the evidence. Revealing the evidence is the paragon thing to do though, regardless of what the writers say. Not doing so is exceptionally silly, since you do nothng at all to destroy the evidence, and concieling it could easily implicate Tali without clearing Rael's name.



Hiding the evidence is the expedient, "rules, what rules?" approach, hence renegade.

[Mystranna Kelteel]

AdmiralCheez wrote...
There is when you start telling other people that they're wasting time and being melodramatic.  That's snide and uncalled for.

I would disagree.  Apparently he came in here to tell me to stop arguing because it was a subjective matter.  If he wasn't bringing any drama in that post then I feel it was a waste of time.  I don't feel that's snide.  Arguing about this is a waste of time.  I'm not being snide to myself or you because we are both choosing to waste time.

As for melodrama, everyone engages in it at times.  I don't think telling someone they're being melodramatic is particularly insulting.  I was discussing why I thought turning over the data was a good idea.  Why should I stop and why would that offend anyone?

AC: "I didn't give them the evidence because I didn't want to incite political conflict."
MK: "Political conflict is just a side effect.  You can't factor that into your decision because you don't know for sure."
AC: "Actually, if you listen carefully to what the admirals are saying, you can tell that this sort of thing could be really bad news."
MK: "It's still just a side effect."
AC: "Side effects are perfectly legitimate reasons to eliminate an option.  Would you take a medicine if it caused anal leakage?"
MK: "But you still don't know for sure!"
AC: *sighs and wonders if a "well, duh! that's the nature of predictions!" is necessary*

Right, I may have skipped over the anal leakage part because it felt it was unnecessary.  That exchange is you telling me that it is renegade to pursue justice because it causes political turmoil.  My response was that plenty of paragon choices cause similar turmoil as side effects.  the main point being that a side effect of your decision does not dictate the morality of the decision.  And, as I predicted, explaining this to you was a circular argument that I was trying to avoid.

Now see, I actually made a topic asking people to explain why they liked/disliked certain characters, so I'm all for intelligent reasoning.  I totally don't mind if people disagree with me so long as they aren't dicks about it.

However, when the are dicks about it, I get pissed.

Do you think I'm being dickish? I didn't think I was.

So what, you engaged in a battle of attrition in hopes that your superior endurance will win everyone over to your side?

I don't mind a good debate.  I don't mind being proven wrong.  I don't mind people disagreeing with me.

But, like I said before, I can't stand it when people get all dickish about it.

What I did in my previous post is point out that you were being kind of a jerk to Machines Are Us.  You reply with "I never lost my cool in this topic, nor did I attack anyone," when I just showed you precisely where you were getting kind of mean.

Oh, boy, now this I find melodramatic.  I wasn't expecting to "win" or "lose" anything, nor was I fighting a "battle".  I was explaining my POV, and when someone decided to question my POV I defended it.  I don't care if any of you agree with me; I'm not actually trying to make everyone who plays the game hand over the evidence.  My renegade doesn't hand over the evidence because she just doesn't care.  That's a perfectly valid reason too.
I may be blunt in my arguments, mayhap a lot, but I never did lose my cool here.  Never got angry; never got emotional.  People seem to think that engaging in back and forth discussions imply great emotional attachment when I merely enjoy the exchange.

[Xilizhra]

Which Paragon decisions do lead to similar turmoil?

[Mystranna Kelteel]

Xilizhra wrote...
Which Paragon decisions do lead to similar turmoil?

I hope you aren't going to try and compare the levels of turmoil here because the argument is about what makes the decision paragon or renegade.  My opposition seems to be arguing that the results are what makes the decision renegade when I am arguing that it's motive.

That said, releasing Elnora is an obvious paragon decision that causes turmoil.  I believe it is rightly a paragon action because you let someone live.  My opposition's logic would seem to say it should be a renegade decision because it releases a dangerous criminal into society.

But, since this is a cyclical argument as well, and I already brought up that specific example, I'll leave it at that.

[pmac_tk421]

MaaZeus wrote...

If there would be a chance to give the evidence behind closed doors, that would be the right choice. However, in this game you scream out to the whole public a very shocking news that will divide the Quarians between what to do, and drive them into chaos. No, giving the evidence this way is not a good thing, while technically honest it does more harm than good. In the end it can only boost ones self righteous "I didnt lie so I did no wrong" ego.

Keeping your lips tight is NOT dishonest nor lying. Especially on something like this with this severe consequences. It is playing smart. Saying directly that you found no evidence is a lie and therefore dishonest, which Shepard does NOT do in both Renegade and Paragon options charm options. In those Shepard just states the obvious that the whole trial is a farce, WHICH IT IS. A 100% truth.

If you talk to all the admirals afterwards, one of them will realize your hiding something and you can tell him that you found the evidence, lets tali decide or not tell him. Tali chooses no to tell him.

[ZLurps]

To OP:

Most of the Paragon / Renegade paths are IMO very clear in ME games. Just think of what you are trying to achieve and that games paragon/renegade choices aren't any sort of puzzles, game doesn't try to mislead you, and it should be pretty easy to stay on paragon or renegade path.

[CroGamer002]

Paragon ≠ Good


Renegade ≠ Evil

Modifié par Mesina2, 11 février 2011 - 09:02 .

[Chickenpotpie]

Does it matter? Tali is kind of annoying. Wouldn't you rather let her die?

[wizardryforever]

Well, if you're having trouble deciding what to do, there's always the option to give the evidence over to the admirals in private after the trial.  They all suspect that Shepard was hiding something, but they chose not to press the case in the trial.  I don't know if this forfeits Tali's loyalty however.

[Rune-Chan]

Mesina2 wrote...

Paragon ≠ Good


Renegade ≠ Evil

Exactly.

Mercs threaten to kill you, you shoot an explosive barrel before they can fight, that's not being evil, it's just taking a risk and causing damage.

The reason handing over the evidence gives renegade points isn't because it's "evil" it's because it causes political turmoil and is a risky manouver. It is also renegade because you are betraying a friend to do so, despite the fact that it's really none of your business.

Sparing Elnora is Paragon, despite her being bad because at the time of the decision Shepard doesn't know she is bad, and she surrenders. It's not a case of it being good, but avoiding conflict.

Modifié par Machines Are Us, 11 février 2011 - 09:08 .

[Moiaussi]

Xilizhra wrote...

Which Paragon decisions do lead to similar turmoil?

What has that got to do with anything? If sparing the queen leads to a second Rachnii war, does that mean killing her was actually paragon and sparing her should have been renegade?

[Moiaussi]

Mesina2 wrote...

Paragon ≠ Good

Renegade ≠ Evil

Agreed, however paragon has an affinity for good, and renegade has an affinity for evil.

[Kaltrec]

I think Tali knows more about how the Quarians will react than you could, even if she has a "selfish" reason to keep that information secret.

[Moiaussi]

Kaltrec wrote...

I think Tali knows more about how the Quarians will react than you could, even if she has a "selfish" reason to keep that information secret.

Technically yes, in that she is written by the same people who write the responses of the Quarian people.

Other than that, she spends most of her time away from the fleet and isn't interested in politics. Moreover she didn't express any concerns regarding rioting in the streets. Her concern was for her father's name and legacy.

She was basicly in denial about everything he did.

[MaaZeus]

pmac_tk421 wrote...

MaaZeus wrote...

If there would be a chance to give the evidence behind closed doors, that would be the right choice. However, in this game you scream out to the whole public a very shocking news that will divide the Quarians between what to do, and drive them into chaos. No, giving the evidence this way is not a good thing, while technically honest it does more harm than good. In the end it can only boost ones self righteous "I didnt lie so I did no wrong" ego.

Keeping your lips tight is NOT dishonest nor lying. Especially on something like this with this severe consequences. It is playing smart. Saying directly that you found no evidence is a lie and therefore dishonest, which Shepard does NOT do in both Renegade and Paragon options charm options. In those Shepard just states the obvious that the whole trial is a farce, WHICH IT IS. A 100% truth.

If you talk to all the admirals afterwards, one of them will realize your hiding something and you can tell him that you found the evidence, lets tali decide or not tell him. Tali chooses no to tell him.

Yes. He is the Raels childhood friend whosnameescapesmeATM and he is smart enough to notice that you are not telling something. If you let Tali decide, she wont tell anything. If you choose "the paragon" option and tell him "off the record", Tali wont object but just asks him that do not go spreading around and he agrees.

[Bailyn242]

Mystranna Kelteel wrote...

MaaZeus wrote...
Yes, but you are throwing fuel into a fire. And doing so might make the fire too big, too big to control and it gets out will surely bring chaos.

Or it could burn bright and fast and then die down into nothing as opposed to letting it build and build to explode in an even more deadly fashion later on.

Honestly, the quarians have to deal with this schism sooner or later.  There's nothing ot say that hiding Rael's treason will prevent them from dealing with the schism that obviously does exist and will continue to exist until it's dealt with.

There is no way that you could logically claim that this would burn bright and the burn out. It's kinda like a magnesium starter at the bottom of a pile of deadwood. The heat of the short burning fire would catch the surrounding fuel on fire causing a massive conflagration.

The paragon solution is to not force them to confront the conflict until you can give them an out that avoids the war. Until you can prove that there are two factions among the Geth and that the "True" Geth don't want a war you certainly don't want that evidence coming out. Not only that but the trial isn't about the evidence, it's all politics. As a paragon your job would be to expose the truth behind the trial. Paragon or Renegade or my personal favorite "incite the croud" options all focus on that element.

Veetor and Kal FTW! Exile her and you might as well exile me! WOOT!!

[Chickenpotpie]

This is funny! The guy that made the topic was a TROLL. And it's almost FIVE PAGES. AND HE said only TWO things

[AkiKishi]

Cleveland Ninja wrote...

I'm trying to get a full paragon playthrough. Turning over the evidence is the right thing to do, right? If I didn't, wouldn't that just be dishonest?

It's pretty easy.

Renegade - Head
Paragon - Heart

Logical choice (head) is to clear her name. The heart choice is to be considerate of her feelings.

The head/heart thing works with nearly every choice in the game.