44 réponses à ce sujet

[twisty77]

Before you decide to crucify me for this, please read this article on IGN: xbox360.ign.com/articles/115/1159605p1.html

Now, I happen to agree with the article. I feel that the emotional aspect of the game is partially lost when you're playing the game with a specific intention to play Paragon or Renegade. I feel that Bioware was more on the right track in ME1(where you could purchase Paragon/Renegade conversation options with skill points) than in ME2(where to have certain conversation options, you had to use Paragon/Renegade almost exclusively in other conversations so you don't screw yourself over by not having a choice available).

So here's my proposal: 1) Go back to the ME1 option, where to save Wrex, for instance, you just have to level up your charm/intimidate

or 2) Do away with it all together. Now I know this would cause some serious backlash, but ME3 has the potential to be one of the best games in history. Let's not screw with the emotional aspect of it by making us choose something we didn't want to just because we need the Paragon/Renegade points.

Example: In ME3, We get another spot in the game similar to Virmire, say you have to kill 2 of your squaddies UNLESS you have the Paragon/Renegade points built up to open the conversation option to save them. How lame is that? You should be able to kill or save based on what you want to do emotionally, not by what the game within the game says you can/cannot do.

Thoughts?

Modifié par twisty77, 07 avril 2011 - 07:39 .

[SmokePants]

There is still a vague value for having an option, even if it's an illusion.

I really hate the argument that games have to meet the standard of other media when it comes to narrative. It's like deriding human beings for not being able to breath underwater like fish. It's completely dismissive of the myriad advantages that videogames have over those other forms of media.

Games have narrative like humans have SCUBA gear. Close enough. No point in obsessing over demanding the human race transmutatate into Kevin Costner-like gill-people.

Modifié par SmokePants, 07 avril 2011 - 07:55 .

[CulturalGeekGirl]

First, I want to say this: the Paragon and Renegade system is the best-written two-dimensional morality system I've ever encountered in a game. I like it so much more than lightside dark side, whatever you want to call the system in fable, and pretty much any other morality system ever. In a lot of ways, I like it even more than the approval system in DA:O, which I feel encourages even MORE micromanaging and metagaming.

That said, I do agree that there should be a way to walk the line without gimping yourself. ME1's charm/inimidate system was perfect in that regard.

I like the way Paragon and Renegade define their respective character types, though, and the shades of gray inherent in the system. Sometimes there's literally nothing wrong with doing the Renegade thing... or pretty much nothing wrong with it - pinging that bot through Garrus's scope, for example, or shooting the gas tank under that monologuing Krogan. Sometimes it's just the badass option, rather than the "bad" one, and I appreciate that.

The fact that you reliably act in a certain way, and that influences how others perceive you... that makes sense. It's just somewhat muddily implemented. If I'm known for trying to be reasonable, for being forgiving, for being gentle... then my request that people solve their argument reasonably and calm down carries more weight. If I'm known for shooting people in the face, then when I threaten to shoot people in the face, they will be legitimately scared. If I'm known for being reasonable and forgiving, and I threaten to shoot a guy in the face... he probably isn't going to take me seriously. And if I'm known for being reasonable one second and violently unpredictable the next, people might be a little less likely to take me seriously when I call for calm and reason.

That said, there are a lot of actions that fall into P/R and yet don't make sense when you look at that reasoning. If you're always nice to your friends, always reasonable when there still seems like a reasonable solution is available, but will sometimes do something that grabs a quick tactical advantage when it's pretty clear reason isn't going to work... that shouldn't affect the fact that your friends like and trust you. Alternatively, if you're always nice to your friends but mean to your enemies, that shouldn't make your enemies fear you any less. These muddy areas are where the system fails.

So don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Heavy investment into one side of the system shouldn't be tied directly to plot success, but the power of those qualities in defining characters shouldn't be underestimated. A return to the ME1 charm/intimidate skill points thing is a perfectly fine fix.

[BlackEssence]

I respectfully, but HIGHLY, disagree with you and the article.

The whole point of the paragon/renegade system, in MY OPINION, I want to make that clear to everyone who is reading what I am saying right now-IN MY OPINION-was to appeal to you emotionally when dealing with those on your ship and who you encounter. This is key when they allow YOU to be able to customize yourself so that you can put YOURSELF into the game. If having morality in a game is becoming a problem for gamers, then that  is something that I feel that is very, very disturbing. That tells me that the person(s) playing have no morals in real life as well.

You are the captain of a ship and have to make sure that you have the utmost loyalty from ALL of your people, no matter what situation you are in, heck, working at a job in a corporate business, it is imperative that you understand the people working with and under you in order to achieve a goal that you are working towards. So, the impression I am getting from you is:


1: You'd rather go into the game with no emotion what so ever. You'd rather everything was planned out without any consequences to anything that you do.

2: You don't want to hear or see the emotion in your characters face when you insult them about the problems or issues they face in life.

3: You don't want to use your imagination to put yourself in the game and imagine if YOU were the commander of a ship and worry that what you do shows how people will admire or hate you as a person.

4: You want your character to do what a hundred million other RPG games do and have done for years: Have your character just go in and do the right thing or bad thing because that's how they designed it and leave it at that.


I could be absolutely wrong about this, but this is what I am getting from you as well as the person in this article. I can't imagine meeting a man like Thane who is going through a unique situation with his family and not have any kind of moral effect for the man. With no morals in a game like this is like telling a man like Thane with his problems:

"I'm sorry for what you're going through, Thane. I hope it all works out.".


You actually mean to tell me that you wouldn't want to say to Thane:

"Thane, I am so, so sorry. I couldn't imagine what it is like going through so much pain. Going through not being able to be there with your wife when she was killed, how that is effecting your relationship with your son...I just can't imagine that and what hurts me more is that there is NO ONE else willing to help you. Granted, you are a bit late in wanting to stop your son from making the same mistakes as you have, but you want to get involved and because of that....I want to help you.

You don't have much time to live and even though you weren't being the mose desirable dad to Kolyat, you are going out of your way to stop him and reconcile with him and I am seeing no excuses from you when you tell me so. Thane, I want to help you and I truly believe we can set things straight between you and your son."


You wouldn't want to feel any kind of emotional connection with a character like Thane if you had the option to say something like that? I don't think its corny or stupid or weird to feel emotion when playing a game that was designed for you to work on relationships with people you who's lives that are your hands and plus who trust you and you trust them. This is a LESSON we should be learning in REAL life. Working with people whether we like that or not. I just don't see how taking that away from a game like this makes the game better, in my opinion. I would have never gotten into Mass Effect A MONTH AGO and spent ALL OF MY MONEY trading in games to get ME1 and ME2 had there been no moral aspect in a game with such dynamic storylines like this. There aren't many games designed like this and it's a breath of fresh that there are games like this! I get sick and tired of being pre-programed to do just the right or bad thing all of the time. It's nice to get away from that for a while and play something where I have a choice and my choices, like in real life, not only effects me but it effects everyone else around me who are connected to me.

You're saying that taking away the moral system will make it the best game in history, right? It already IS one of the best games in history and that's WITH the moral system already in it. So, wouldn't taking the moral system away from the game make it go a notch down into the category of cliche' hero games as opposed to taking it a notch UP on the later for being an innovative emotion driven game? A characteristic, as I said, that has won is over 100 gaming awards as it is? That doesn't make sense to me.

Maybe I am a strange gamer for wanting to feel that emotional connection or wanting to be blown away by memorable characters like Thane or Garrus or Kaidan because, personally, I don't like being evil. I like being the hero, the one with good morals because in REAL life, my good morals do outweigh the bad most of the time. Like everyone else, I am capable of being renegade in real life, lol! But, what keeps me being the person that I am and that draws people into my direction with no effort is because I am a sweet and compassionate person and act that way towards other people who ALLOW ME TO BE, and the characters that I am allowed to customize and play in games will behave the same way. Does it get boring being good all the time? No. Not for me because I will not let others dictations jepordize how I carry myself--in real life or in a game.

So, the main point I am trying to say is, they need to KEEP the moral system in there. It differentiates the game from so many others because of the storylines and the characters we encounter. Taking it away takes away the emotion and the connection we have with it.

That's just how I feel about it and I humbly, humbly apologize if you feel put off by what I have said. But, this is the kind of round, brown, lady gamer that I am and I won't make any apologies for that.

Modifié par BlackEssence, 07 avril 2011 - 10:31 .

[appleyum]

twisty77 wrote...

Before you decide to crucify me for this, please read this article on IGN: xbox360.ign.com/articles/115/1159605p1.html

Now, I happen to agree with the article. I feel that the emotional aspect of the game is partially lost when you're playing the game with a specific intention to play Paragon or Renegade. I feel that Bioware was more on the right track in ME1(where you could purchase Paragon/Renegade conversation options with skill points) than in ME2(where to have certain conversation options, you had to use Paragon/Renegade almost exclusively in other conversations so you don't screw yourself over by not having a choice available).

So here's my proposal: 1) Go back to the ME1 option, where to save Wrex, for instance, you just have to level up your charm/intimidate

I totally disagree.  The point system you lose the consistancy of a person.  e.g.. A player who is consistently Renegade type person isn't going to run off save a puppy.  You have to work being nice to have that option.

or 2) Do away with it all together. Now I know this would cause some serious backlash, but ME3 has the potential to be one of the best games in history. Let's not screw with the emotional aspect of it by making us choose something we didn't want to just because we need the Paragon/Renegade points.

Why are you being so indecisive?  A war is about to start and you are being wishy washy?  You have to choose a side.

Let's put it this way...saying we should do away Paragon/Renegade would be like telling them to do away with the ending of picking between blowing up Collectors base or keeping it for Cerberus.

Personally, I think the game hasn't gone far enough on Paragon / Renegade decision and consequences(e.g. Baldur's Gate your party member would actually leave you) and both side story still plays out about the same.  But there are hints that we will really feel the consequence in Mass Effect 3


If you are really unhappy about it then there's always replay... where you can inherit your paragon and renegade.  And if I remember correctly in Mass Effect 1 if you are to too  wishy washy between your charm and intimidate points you could have some option not avilable to you.  The game even had a message that encourage to replay to get more dialogue option. 

Modifié par appleyum, 07 avril 2011 - 09:06 .

[Malanek]

Linking your success in the story to always selecting the top or the bottom choice is a terrible game mechanic. I don't really like making the player choose between combat and non-combat skills either. Come up with something else altogether. In fact I would say the charm and intimidate options shouldn't always work but always be available. You should have to judge whether such an action is appropriate to the situation, and if you get it wrong, the situation could poetentially be made worse.

[Nathan Redgrave]

I like the Paragon/Renegade system, except when trying to be a mix of the two has a negative impact on my gameplay for no apparent reason. When the game encourages you to be uber-consistent for the sake of always being able to use those Charm or Intimidate options, you start not wanted to mix up your moral choices depending on when you think it's morally okay to perform this or that Renegade/Paragon action. Thus a perfectly reasonable allows-for-shades-of-grey moral-choice system nudges you into black-or-white territory. This is the Paragon/Renegade system's main flaw.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Nathan Redgrave wrote...

I like the Paragon/Renegade system, except when trying to be a mix of the two has a negative impact on my gameplay for no apparent reason. When the game encourages you to be uber-consistent for the sake of always being able to use those Charm or Intimidate options, you start not wanted to mix up your moral choices depending on when you think it's morally okay to perform this or that Renegade/Paragon action. Thus a perfectly reasonable allows-for-shades-of-grey moral-choice system nudges you into black-or-white territory. This is the Paragon/Renegade system's main flaw.

Way to sum up my wall of text in a paragraph, jerk. Stupid concise people, getting their points accross succinctly.

Modifié par CulturalGeekGirl, 07 avril 2011 - 09:53 .

[Sinophile]

To me, the Paragon/renegade aspect seemed like a step backward for Bioware. In titles such Knights Of The Old Republic, or any of the D&D based games, good and evil were pretty clear-cut. However, in DA:O, there was no good/evil slider, and they even advertised it so on the back of the box. My greatest annoyance with the paragon/renegade slider is late in the game, especially with Tali's and Samara's quest, both of which require either a high renegade or high paragon score.
On the other hand, I suppose that the slider makes sense if you view it as a "reputation" system, rather than a moral compass.

[Saaziel]

I'll throw in my 2 credit chit here,

I'd almost prefer to have the Paragon/Renegade system affecting storytelling only. Using Interrupts or having a high enough score would unlock special dialogues with Shipmates and Squadmates whether its on the Normandy or on the battlefield.

If you use the Renegade interrupt to push the Merc leader of the Dantius towers for example, it could trigger a conversation with Grunt where he reconsider the "Imprints" left by Okeer to be wrong regarding humans ; And that they and the Krogans are more alike than he previously thought. Or for example it could trigger a conversation with Jack where she reminisce about a similar event in her life. Similarly it might attract scorn from Jacob or Mordin or vice-versa.

I don't like it (The P/R system ) affecting the game in drastic manners. You should still make decisions that would have consequences . However, Having squad members lose loyalty or die because you didn't set kittens on fire seems like a haphazard way of having fun role playing a game.

Otherwise you just end up following a "Morality guide" and not giving a damn about the story (Incidentally what I've done so far ). And at that point why bother with a story at all?

Modifié par Saaziel, 08 avril 2011 - 03:09 .

[sterling_archer]

A while ago someone here suggested keeping Paragon and Renegade but shuffling the choices up on the dialogue wheel. Paragon will not always be on the top and renegade must always be on the bottom. That way, you actually have to think about the choices if you want go full Paragon or Renegade. I don't know how much this would actually change things but I would like if Bioware implemented this.

As for charm/intimidate, I guess I support ME1's system not just for dialogue choices but levelling altogether.
No freaking loot system though

[Devbo22]

Or they could add a third level, the all powerful metagaming option... yeah, I got nothing.

[Ravenmyste]

CulturalGeekGirl wrote...

Nathan Redgrave wrote...

I like the Paragon/Renegade system, except when trying to be a mix of the two has a negative impact on my gameplay for no apparent reason. When the game encourages you to be uber-consistent for the sake of always being able to use those Charm or Intimidate options, you start not wanted to mix up your moral choices depending on when you think it's morally okay to perform this or that Renegade/Paragon action. Thus a perfectly reasonable allows-for-shades-of-grey moral-choice system nudges you into black-or-white territory. This is the Paragon/Renegade system's main flaw.

Way to sum up my wall of text in a paragraph, jerk. Stupid concise people, getting their points accross succinctly.

in other words you wasnt even trying to make a point just  make a wall of text that person cut your wall down to a good paragraph and got the point arcross faster... who the jerk you or the one that got thier point across  that was clearer then  what you printed.

[Saaziel]

I think it was meant as a compliment.

[CulturalGeekGirl]

Saaziel wrote...

I think it was meant as a compliment.

It was indeed! Sarcasm! On the Internet! Exclaimation points! Whole Team is Jacob!

[jeweledleah]

Saaziel wrote...

I'll throw in my 2 credit chit here,

I'd almost prefer to have the Paragon/Renegade system affecting storytelling only. Using Interrupts or having a high enough score would unlock special dialogues with Shipmates and Squadmates whether its on the Normandy or on the battlefield.

If you use the Renegade interrupt to push the Merc leader of the Dantius towers for example, it could trigger a conversation with Grunt where he reconsider the "Imprints" left by Okeer to be wrong regarding humans ; And that they and the Krogans are more alike than he previously thought. Or for example it could trigger a conversation with Jack where she reminisce about a similar event in her life. Similarly it might attract scorn from Jacob or Mordin or vice-versa.

I don't like it (The P/R system ) affecting the game in drastic manners. You should still make decisions that would have consequences . However, Having squad members lose loyalty or die because you didn't set kittens on fire seems like a haphazard way of having fun role playing a game.

Otherwise you just end up following a "Morality guide" and not giving a damn about the story (Incidentally what I've done so far ). And at that point why bother with a story at all?

I like the way you think!  and honestly I personaly prefer DAO system where you just level up one persuasion skill tree adn then you can either charm or intimidate at will, depending on what works best in context of your character and then those choices affect the dialogue/aproval of your squad mates.  just without bribes, I mean gifts >_>

ME1 had something similar, except you had 2 meters so you had to either sacrifice one of the combat skills, or stick to one of the meters only :/

[DPSSOC]

I don't want to see them get rid of the system completely but it definitely needs some fine tuning. Despite what some people have argued you can play a Paragade or Renegon character without being completely schizo. I played ME1 where I was nice, compassionate, etc with my crew (my buds), civillians, and Alliance military (much as I would have liked to smack that one Admiral upside the head). I was also completely and utterly ruthless when dealing with enemies, surrendering criminals, etc. That is not a weird or unbalanced mentality; I think most of us would agree we're nicer to our friends, family, and people we haven't yet gotten an impression of; than we are of people who are being pricks to us.

Now thanks to the Charm/Intimidate option in ME1 I could play a character this way and still use persuasion options when it was appropriate (not just a magic "I Win" button). ME2 is much less forgiving and I've found myself, rather than adjusting how I play my character (to hell with the system I'm Roleplaying dammit), the order I play the rest of the game. I know that if I leave Samara's loyalty mission til the very end I won't be able to resist Morinth's powers and be denied that choice (not that it matters), so I do it earlier that sort of thing.

What I'd like to see in ME3 is a step back, bring back at least a Persuasion skill if you don't want to divide it into 2, or incorporate it into the class skill I really don't care. The skill system worked, it allowed players to play the characters they wanted at the expense of a few skill points. If you want to put points into Overload instead then you accept that there are going to be persuasion options you can't take, but it's a choice you've made rather than the game penalizing you for not being one dimensional.

Modifié par DPSSOC, 08 avril 2011 - 04:17 .

[Golden Owl]

sterling_archer wrote...

A while ago someone here suggested keeping Paragon and Renegade but shuffling the choices up on the dialogue wheel. Paragon will not always be on the top and renegade must always be on the bottom. That way, you actually have to think about the choices if you want go full Paragon or Renegade. I don't know how much this would actually change things but I would like if Bioware implemented this.

I think the only way that could really work is if the dialogue wheel was kept more in line with what Shep actually says....I find often, that when I assume the dialogue wheel states one thing, Shep says something that seems to have only minor similarities with the dialogue I chose.

[appleyum]

Sinophile wrote...

To me, the Paragon/renegade aspect seemed like a step backward for Bioware. In titles such Knights Of The Old Republic, or any of the D&D based games, good and evil were pretty clear-cut. However, in DA:O, there was no good/evil slider, and they even advertised it so on the back of the box. My greatest annoyance with the paragon/renegade slider is late in the game, especially with Tali's and Samara's quest, both of which require either a high renegade or high paragon score.
On the other hand, I suppose that the slider makes sense if you view it as a "reputation" system, rather than a moral compass.

Eh for Tali?  There were 5 ways how you can end it.  You can still get the perfect ending without paragaon/ renegade if you did a few prerequisite

Samara quest what do you need high paragon/renegade for?

sterling_archer wrote...

A while ago someone here
suggested keeping Paragon and Renegade but shuffling the choices up on
the dialogue wheel. Paragon will not always be on the top and renegade
must always be on the bottom. That way, you actually have to think about
the choices if you want go full Paragon or Renegade. I don't know how
much this would actually change things but I would like if Bioware
implemented this

That's a step backward.  They whole purpose of the wheel was to streamline the dialogue so you can watch it like a movie without spending a lot of time picking the choice.

Modifié par appleyum, 08 avril 2011 - 05:26 .

[ErebUs890]

The best morality system is: No morality system. I really hate these good/evil lightside/darkside, and paragon/renegade systems. DA:O and DA2 practically did it perfectly.

[The Real Bowser]

I strongly disagree. I love the paragon/renegade system. No need to go into details, most of the posters above me have done that already. However, I specifically like how Mass Effect 2 has handled the renegade side. Rather than just being a bad, evil sorta guy, you are a badass. Likewise, instead of just being a kind softy nice guy, you are a hero.

The game would not feel the same without them.

[twisty77]

BlackEssence wrote...

I respectfully, but HIGHLY, disagree with you and the article.

The whole point of the paragon/renegade system, in MY OPINION, I want to make that clear to everyone who is reading what I am saying right now-IN MY OPINION-was to appeal to you emotionally when dealing with those on your ship and who you encounter. This is key when they allow YOU to be able to customize yourself so that you can put YOURSELF into the game. If having morality in a game is becoming a problem for gamers, then that  is something that I feel that is very, very disturbing. That tells me that the person(s) playing have no morals in real life as well.

<snip>

I am not put off by what you said at all. I am in fact a gamer that has very high personal moral standards. I very highly support a morality system in games; I just think that the Paragon/Renegade system needs to be redone or not be tied to the conversation options that you have available. I'm fine with the conversation options giving you P/R points.

One of the options that I saw in here, I really like. While your conversation choice will count towards one direction or the other, if you start to run along one line, then you will build a rep in that direction. I think I'm going to modify my opening statement and say that it shouldn't be removed, just modified. Sent back to ME1 status or something else.

[Baihu1983]

Love them but i think you should allways have the choice. So during a cutscene rather than just a paragon or renegade option poping up have both.

[Golden Owl]

twisty77 wrote...

BlackEssence wrote...

I respectfully, but HIGHLY, disagree with you and the article.

The whole point of the paragon/renegade system, in MY OPINION, I want to make that clear to everyone who is reading what I am saying right now-IN MY OPINION-was to appeal to you emotionally when dealing with those on your ship and who you encounter. This is key when they allow YOU to be able to customize yourself so that you can put YOURSELF into the game. If having morality in a game is becoming a problem for gamers, then that  is something that I feel that is very, very disturbing. That tells me that the person(s) playing have no morals in real life as well.

<snip>

I am not put off by what you said at all. I am in fact a gamer that has very high personal moral standards. I very highly support a morality system in games; I just think that the Paragon/Renegade system needs to be redone or not be tied to the conversation options that you have available. I'm fine with the conversation options giving you P/R points.

One of the options that I saw in here, I really like. While your conversation choice will count towards one direction or the other, if you start to run along one line, then you will build a rep in that direction. I think I'm going to modify my opening statement and say that it shouldn't be removed, just modified. Sent back to ME1 status or something else.

It is a very good idea actually...it would make a lot of sense.