CulturalGeekGirl wrote...
And thank you for not getting angry at me - looking back at my post I cringe a bit at how sarcastic I sound at the beginning.
I understand the urge to show your support for the minority opinion when there seems to be a dogpile going on, I do that myself quite often (look back at... well... basically any collector base argument on these boards). And these threads often become harder to process as they go on. I pretty much always start out by clearly stating "both choices are good" in posts, and as things go on I get worse and worse about appending that disclaimer. Still, there are actually a few Paragon players in this thread who say they still always (or almost always) let Garrus take the shot, which is fascniating and awesome to me.
I've often said that they need to make Renegade more tempting. A great example of how they managed to do it was Elnora in Samara's mission... a circumstance where letting someone go turns out to be the wrong decision. Another possibility would be something like this: you find a top secret prototype weapon that was stolen from the alliance. You can either keep it yourself, or return it to them. That choice would be very in character for Paragons and Renegades, and would also give a clear, tempting benefit to Renegades. Also, given the cash flow situation in ME2, it would be interesting if they offered Renegades more opportunity to directly profit from amoral actions: have looting in the plague zone give Renegade points, etc. Make it so that Renegades can buy all the upgrades midway through the game, while Paragons have to scrape all the side missions to come up with enough to upgrade everything.
It would have been interesting if Zaeed and Kasumi were only loyal if you completed their missions Renegade/Paragon respectively. I use them both as examples because they're DLC characters, so it feels less like you're losing out on a vital part of the game, and they can be more experimental. I sometimes wonder if Zaeed wasn't designed that way from the start, and the Paragon "out" for him was written in at the last minute.
Garrus is defined by his tendency to saunter vaguely downwards if not encouraged to think things through, but he's also defined by his trust in and respect for Shepard. Putting these two defining qualities in conflict with each other makes for great drama, so I'm glad they left it in.
EDIT: God **** formatting screw up my post...
It's not a problem. I sometimes write posts entirely meant to annoy others or to tease them or sometimes I would defend a statement that I don't trully believe in just to play the devil's advocate. I don't think I've ever done this though when I see willingness to listen and logic behind someone's thoughts so this isn't the case.
Indeed I've also liked the nuances that the game offers. Unfortunately this gets worse with ME2 since the system doesn't allow you to role-play properly as ME1 did. Hopefully they'll adress the issue in ME3 and not
tie morality with persuasion. And no visual cues to morality (I dig the scars and the red eyes but please this isn't the dark side).
With your next paragraph you instantly rise in my book. I don't think I've met someone with the same opinion (especially a paragon) here on this forum. I feel exactly the same - tempting, alluring are the words I would also use. This was done very proficiently in KotoR - by the time I left the first planet I barely had 500 credits from all the self-less actions I did as a light-sider. As a dark sider I had 9000 at the same point. Now I was much younger back then and less cynical so I felt really bad for my actions
but you get my point.
See most of the other paragons would say - "**** off, don't touch paragon, you are deushbag, so play deushbag, paragon are supposed to get good stuff". But as it stands the system is fractured because currently all
renegade actions are needless and do not benefit Shepard or humanity in any way. Why focus on Sovereign and leave the Council when you can save them with minimal losses and still save the Galaxy? All those criminals
somehow get magically reformed and become good-standing citizens. Elnora is the only exception to this rule of thumb which pleasantly surprised me. Another problem is the system of allocating points, which
unfortunately prevents more gray players to play effectively since they can't do a simple persuasion. Another problem is the lack of content for renegade players. Currently paragon get content, renegade get less
content. The most stupid argument is how can you expect death people to make appereance - well nobody expects that. But KotoR did it right again - you kill Juhani on Dantouine and her best friend as a result becomes a
sith on Korriban since the Council doesn't punish you. She then proceeds to attack you for revenge. Let a mother and son meet Shepard and curse him for killing their father hoping that he rots somewhere.
This ties in with your next paragraph - indeed convincing Zaeed to work with
you and be loyal despite failure of the mission seems incredibly stupid to me. The man has been a lone wolf, consumed by anger and rage for 20 years if I'm not mistaken and then Shepard convinces him in 5 min he
will be an excellent addition to the team and a good puppy even though Shep decision resulted in said failure.
Garrus to me instantly became my favorite because of his nuances. When first playing ME1 the turians instantly felt to me as competion in the face of Nihlus and Saren. They seemed the other major race out there since we see them before any other race. Then of course it becomes more complex within the Citadel but I pretty much gathered the turians are the strongest military race so they instantly got my attention. Garrus is also the first decent turian we meet. Pallin doesn't like humans, Saren hates us and the turian Councillor is a ****. So I was interested what was Garrus's beef and why was he interested in helping humans and working with them. What made him different from his species. I felt like the relationship was as big brother (sister in my case since I play female Shepard) and a younger one. You teach him about humans, about morality, methods. Garrus happens to be reliable, tech expert (he could hack or had some other skill that helped with salvage, I've forgotten a bit about ME1 by now) and was another soldier. So I spent the entire game with him and Kaiden Alenko (he of course reminded me of Carth so he got my 2nd favorite due to nostalgia). Garrus is also not some preacher of morality, he wants to get the job done. His "LM" is also interesting. In ME2 he seems a bit grown up although I wish his LM was more reflecting of that. A bit more cynical but Garrus was always a rebel. And since he was my romance in ME2 he'll be fine. He needs a bit of guidance from a woman, otherwise he's perfect
.
And since I hear the name of Saren:
Saren is the best character in the entire ME series. A character that is real, with sufficient
motivations. Moreover a personal adversary and challenge to Shepard, the wall the first human Spectre has to overcome to prove to himself and the galaxy, that humanity is ready to have one of their own in
such position. That Saren is rogue is inconsequential.
Saren is second Turian we meet in the game and gives a long-lasting perception. In a way if it isn't for
him my opinion on the Turian race would have been different. His motivations for hating humanity are real, understandable and provide another facet on human-turian relationships. He provides an example
of what Shepard could have become.
I believe ultimately they could have become friends (A renegade Shepard, mind you) and some sort of
anti-hero camaraderie happening between them. Saren, like Garrus are believable characters - realists, similar to Renegade Shep.
Also Anderson is a tool.
Saren to me is perfectly reasonable and realistic. What can you do when you are the only one knowing about a
threat of such magnitude and the fact that no one would believe you. Nothing except get to the rationale that submission is preferable to extinction. He was alone in that knowledge and
I suspect he was glad that there was someone else to share it with him in the face of Shepard.
Saren is not a cliche villain - in that when he realized there was chance and that he was wrong, he was brave enough to do what's necessary even if it meant his death. Which proves that Saren is ultimately selfless despite the renegade ways in which he deals.
Ultimate paragons/idealist are stupid as characters, but ultimately evil characters with no motivation are even more stupid.
And no I've not bothered with any poorly written books or comics.
Modifié par Undertone, 10 mai 2011 - 10:56 .
Retour en haut
