904 réponses à ce sujet

[Darkhour]

Seboist wrote...

Darkhour wrote...

Seboist wrote...

It's weird that Zaeed denounces it, even though when we first meet him he's beating the living daylights out of a Batarian and ends up shooting him in the leg.

He wasn't interrogating that batarian.  He was beating him into submission and angry that he had to chase him around. He shoot him because he tried to run.

That prison guard wasn't interrogating that prisoner either.

Ah, yes. You are correct, sir.

There is some misplaced dialog, depending on who you bring, which leaves the (wrong) impression that it is an interrogation, but you are correct.

[DPSSOC]

That could just be the allies assumption about the beating. Even Shepard can ask the guy in the next cell what Bimmy (I think) knows. The squaddies, like Shepard, assume it's an interrogation rather than just a vicious beating with no purpose.

[Mecha Tengu]

metagaming morality pansies always win the day in video games

[InvincibleHero]

Seboist wrote...

It's weird that Zaeed denounces it, even though when we first meet him he's beating the living daylights out of a Batarian and ends up shooting him in the leg.

Plenty of people don't practice what they preach.

[Golden Owl]

Mecha Tengu wrote...

metagaming morality pansies always win the day in video games

Why is it so often bl**dy assumed that just because someone with strong moral standards is meta gaming? That p*sses me off...<_<...

[Seboist]

Rojahar wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

Mecha Tengu wrote...

metagaming morality pansies always win the day in video games

Why is it so often bl**dy assumed that just because someone with strong moral standards is meta gaming? That p*sses me off...<_<...

It's the part where EVERYTHING turns out and perfect, no matter what, that's metagame-y. Always pick the most paragon option, and things will always work out, perfectly, with the least consequences possible while also maintaining the highest morality. Really, what's the point of choice in Mass Effect? It may as well be KOTOR, where Dark Side choices were really just there for non-canon trolling lulz, rather than as a legitimate path.

Yep, like how it's demoralizing to choose to sacrifice the council thinking it's the best practical choice only to see that you can save them AND destroy Sovereign with minimal losses by choosing Paragon. Nobody ends up caring that you sacrificed human lives to save them either.

Then you have other cases like with saving the Rachni Queen where Wrex completely forgets about it and no Krogan even complains that Shepard basically pissed on the graves of their ancestors by doing that.

[Someone With Mass]

Golden Owl wrote...

Why is it so often bl**dy assumed that just because someone with strong moral standards is meta gaming? That p*sses me off...<_<...

Don't worry. They can't word their reasons any better, so they have to resort to generic internet terms, like retcon, fanservice and meta-gaming. Just ignore and move on.

[lolwut666]

Personally, I thought there was plenty of reason to let the Council die. They're useless stooges.

The galaxy could really use someone more competent on the Council seats.

The only reason I saved them is because of thousands that were inside the DA.

[Seboist]

Rojahar wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Rojahar wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

Mecha Tengu wrote...

metagaming morality pansies always win the day in video games

Why is it so often bl**dy assumed that just because someone with strong moral standards is meta gaming? That p*sses me off...<_<...

It's the part where EVERYTHING turns out and perfect, no matter what, that's metagame-y. Always pick the most paragon option, and things will always work out, perfectly, with the least consequences possible while also maintaining the highest morality. Really, what's the point of choice in Mass Effect? It may as well be KOTOR, where Dark Side choices were really just there for non-canon trolling lulz, rather than as a legitimate path.

Yep, like how it's demoralizing to choose to sacrifice the council thinking it's the best practical choice only to see that you can save them AND destroy Sovereign with minimal losses by choosing Paragon. Nobody ends up caring that you sacrificed human lives to save them either.

Then you have other cases like with saving the Rachni Queen where Wrex completely forgets about it and no Krogan even complains that Shepard basically pissed on the graves of their ancestors by doing that.

Exactly. Why ever not save the Council? Everyone will love you for saving them, and everyone will hate you if you don't (even if you choose the middle option not to prioritize killing Sovereign, rather than purposely letting them die). Why not spare the Rachni Queen? She'll apparently help you as a reward, but even if you killed her, there will still be Rachni Husks in ME3.

There is NO reason not to choose the Paragon options for all major decisions, other than... I dunno... purposely making a stupid Shepard where nothing works out for her/him, and countless reasons why you should choose Paragon in all major decisions. I specifically say major decisions, the ones that matter. Not something like punching the reporter, or other petty stuff that doesn't matter either way anyway.

BW doesn't even have the decency to let us see the human led council to make up for all the cameos we've lost(who all had logical replacements by the way). Talk about cutting corners...

Modifié par Seboist, 23 mai 2011 - 10:48 .

[Someone With Mass]

Why should the human council waste their time with Shepard?

The old one pretty much just mocks him and sends him on his merry way.

[Seboist]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Why should the human council waste their time with Shepard?

The old one pretty much just mocks him and sends him on his merry way.

Because Shepard refused to sacrifice human lives to save alien bureaucrats when the galaxy was at stake and for indirectly putting them in power.

That's as good a reason as any.

[Someone With Mass]

I can't see many Paragon or Renegade choices in ME2 that can be viewed as "right or wrong", because it's up to the player's preference.

[Someone With Mass]

Seboist wrote...
Because Shepard refused to sacrifice human lives to save alien bureaucrats when the galaxy was at stake and for indirectly putting them in power.

That's as good a reason as any.

I guess he should be thrown a party for every single life he saved too, right?

[TobyHasEyes]

I play Paragon, and I gotta admit I decided it was a necessary sacrifice to let the Council die and to focus on Sovereign instead.. and I do feel like people who took that route were shortchanged. I don't mind so much that the galaxy mistrust you because of it, people don't always accept your reasons, but I would like the chance to put that view across.

And I do wanna see the new human-led (but with aliens) Council too..

[Someone With Mass]

You know, you can save lives as Renegade too. Like those salarian workers on Thane's recruitment mission.

Renegades are just doing it in a manner so the people they save don't really want to thank them. Like Daniel.

And I find it very silly when people are whining over missing out on something as trivial as a simple gesture of gratitude. Behaving like they need those to feed their ego.

[GenericPlayer2]

I just realized that when you use the paragon interrupts to save the Sick Batarian and the dying Salarian, the game does not even deduct a medigel from your inventory!!!

Why is it that every paragon decision seems to come at no cost what so ever? I agree with some people that there is such a thing as making the right choice, but doing what is right is not easy? In ME2 its right and easy!

Modifié par GenericPlayer2, 23 mai 2011 - 02:14 .

[Moiaussi]

lolwut666 wrote...

Personally, I thought there was plenty of reason to let the Council die. They're useless stooges.

The galaxy could really use someone more competent on the Council seats.

The only reason I saved them is because of thousands that were inside the DA.

Assassinations rarely bring about improvements in leadership. Instead of useless stooges you end up with even more useless stooges who are plotting to avenge the fallen instead of doing something useful.

In my case though I saw it as the Citadel fleets not denting Sovereign so dealing with the Geth fleets (including those on the DA) took priority, and they could be engaged while closing with Sovereign. Sadly we don't know how the respective scenarios played out, although that might be for the best. If saving the Council proved tacitcly best, the renegade crowd would be complaining even more.

[DPSSOC]

Golden Owl wrote...

Mecha Tengu wrote...

metagaming morality pansies always win the day in video games

Why is it so often bl**dy assumed that just because someone with strong moral standards is meta gaming? That p*sses me off...<_<...

It's the accusation thrown out by some extremist Renegade players that Paragon decisions are stupid and Paragon players merely pick them because they know the game won't make them pay for said stupidity.  Now while letting career criminals run free because they pinky swore not to be a nuisance again doesn't strike me as the most intelligent of options I wouldn't consider it stupid, admittedly with one exception these criminals aren't particularly dangerous.  As for the decisions that actually matter (those that have the potential to effect the plot of the game) I think Bioware did a great job of making them each equally reasonable dependent on your (or your Shepard's) value system.

The problem is they didn't do such a good job carrying that over into ME2.  If we look at the Renegade outcomes (and I love how Bioware did the Renegade outcomes) we get the desired outcome of our decisions as well as an undesired or unexpected outcome.  With the Council we ensured the defeat of Sovereign, saved human lives, increased humanity's power, whatever your reasons may have been we got it, but as a result the aliens are hostile not only to Shepard but all humanity making it hard for the Alliance to convince them to work together and causing problems in interspecies communities (like the Citadel).

That is good storytelling.

Paragons however don't appear to have the same balance.  Paragons get their desired outcome but don't seem to suffer the exclusive undesired, unexpected one (Council not helping doesn't count as that's universal).  Council again you save the Council, civilians, DA, help strengthen galactic unity, etc. whatever you wanted out of it chances are you got, but then you don't see anything go wrong from your choice.  There's no indication that humanity is any worse off for the loss of 8 cruisers, nobody back home seems bothered that human lives were thrown away to save a bunch of alien bureaucrats, etc.

That is bad storytelling, when every choice you make turns out perfectly you rob the choice of value or weight.

Someone With Mass wrote...
Why should the human council waste their time with Shepard?

Because they owe him/her their jobs?/joke

[Seboist]

DPSSOC wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

Mecha Tengu wrote...

metagaming morality pansies always win the day in video games

Why is it so often bl**dy assumed that just because someone with strong moral standards is meta gaming? That p*sses me off...<_<...

It's the accusation thrown out by some extremist Renegade players that Paragon decisions are stupid and Paragon players merely pick them because they know the game won't make them pay for said stupidity.  Now while letting career criminals run free because they pinky swore not to be a nuisance again doesn't strike me as the most intelligent of options I wouldn't consider it stupid, admittedly with one exception these criminals aren't particularly dangerous.  As for the decisions that actually matter (those that have the potential to effect the plot of the game) I think Bioware did a great job of making them each equally reasonable dependent on your (or your Shepard's) value system.

The problem is they didn't do such a good job carrying that over into ME2.  If we look at the Renegade outcomes (and I love how Bioware did the Renegade outcomes) we get the desired outcome of our decisions as well as an undesired or unexpected outcome.  With the Council we ensured the defeat of Sovereign, saved human lives, increased humanity's power, whatever your reasons may have been we got it, but as a result the aliens are hostile not only to Shepard but all humanity making it hard for the Alliance to convince them to work together and causing problems in interspecies communities (like the Citadel).

That is good storytelling.

Paragons however don't appear to have the same balance.  Paragons get their desired outcome but don't seem to suffer the exclusive undesired, unexpected one (Council not helping doesn't count as that's universal).  Council again you save the Council, civilians, DA, help strengthen galactic unity, etc. whatever you wanted out of it chances are you got, but then you don't see anything go wrong from your choice.  There's no indication that humanity is any worse off for the loss of 8 cruisers, nobody back home seems bothered that human lives were thrown away to save a bunch of alien bureaucrats, etc.

That is bad storytelling, when every choice you make turns out perfectly you rob the choice of value or weight.

Someone With Mass wrote...
Why should the human council waste their time with Shepard?

Because they owe him/her their jobs?/joke

Yeah, the Paragon outcomes don't have anything to get the player to wonder "Was it worth it?" in the same way the Renegade ones do.

In the case of Shepard saving the council he should have ended up facing a relative of an Alliance serviceman who died on one of those eight cruisers who feels bitter and betrayed over it.

[crimzontearz]

I think it's funny

A lot of people are blaming the players for "metagaming" when the real problem is that bioware created a system in which unless one sticks to full paragon or full renegade he/she gets the short end of the stickin the end...

so....What is a paragade (like me, was mostly paragon in ME1 but always used intimidate options with certain individuals and always made some renegade choices) or a renegon supposed to do? watch loyalties go bye bye because shepard's dialectic skills are not tied to his intellect but to how much of a d****bag or saint he has been up until that point?....Please.

Also I do agree the choices positive outcome ratio is severely skewed

[TobyHasEyes]

Just to note.. choosing to allow the Council to die in order to focus on Sovereign is not only a Renegade option, can also be neutral