904 réponses à ce sujet

[lolwut666]

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

[Golden Owl]

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

I'm rather sick of it myself....would like to see rich play content for both sides personally, but don't get why some people seem so hell bent on punishing paragons.

[tjzsf]

Golden Owl wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

I'm rather sick of it myself....would like to see rich play content for both sides personally, but don't get why some people seem so hell bent on punishing paragons.

Because there are quite a few instances where being a "jerk" can the logically sound thing to do, but never any instances where being nice when you shouldn't have came back to bite you.
IOW, because paragons are never punished, while renegades are always punished, which is bad because we presumably like this game for averting "stupid evil" and "good is dumb".

[AK404]

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

Some renegade decisions are actually the best way to go.  Examples include Mordin's LM, Miranda's LM, Grunt's LM (all interrupts), and Thane's LM (first Renegade option makes the interrogation go by FAST).  The rationalization for the genophage is classified as Renegade as well, though the reasoning behind it is very good.

I think what bugs some people is that Renegade decisions are either http://tvtropes.org/...upidEvil]Stupid Evil[/url] or so obviously stupid that it falls beyond evil and into childishness.

[Manic Sheep]

Golden Owl wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

I'm rather sick of it myself....would like to see rich play content for both sides personally, but don't get why some people seem so hell bent on punishing paragons.

I want a paragon  choice to backfire because that more interesting and you shouldn’t be right all the time. I want a renegade choice to backfire too for the same reason, you can't do the things renegades do and not expect some negative repercussions but that’s the sort of thing I like in my stories I guess.
Alternatively have every choice have both pros and cons and they defiantly should not have less content for either group.

Modifié par Manic Sheep, 11 mai 2011 - 01:46 .

[Golden Owl]

tjzsf wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

I'm rather sick of it myself....would like to see rich play content for both sides personally, but don't get why some people seem so hell bent on punishing paragons.

Because there are quite a few instances where being a "jerk" can the logically sound thing to do, but never any instances where being nice when you shouldn't have came back to bite you.
IOW, because paragons are never punished, while renegades are always punished, which is bad because we presumably like this game for averting "stupid evil" and "good is dumb".

As far as I'm aware and have read, don't renegades just miss out on a few emails and cameo's...all very small content wise.

[Golden Owl]

Manic Sheep wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

I'm rather sick of it myself....would like to see rich play content for both sides personally, but don't get why some people seem so hell bent on punishing paragons.

I want paragon a choice to backfire because that more interesting and you shouldn’t be right all the time. I want a renegade choices to backfire too for the same reason, you can't do the things renegades do and not expect some negative repercussions but that’s the sort of thing I like in my stories I guess.
Alternatively have every choice have both pros and cons and they defiantly should not have less content for either group.

Yes!......see that I agree with Manic Sheep...well said

[Manic Sheep]

Golden Owl wrote...

tjzsf wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

I'm rather sick of it myself....would like to see rich play content for both sides personally, but don't get why some people seem so hell bent on punishing paragons.

Because there are quite a few instances where being a "jerk" can the logically sound thing to do, but never any instances where being nice when you shouldn't have came back to bite you.
IOW, because paragons are never punished, while renegades are always punished, which is bad because we presumably like this game for averting "stupid evil" and "good is dumb".

As far as I'm aware and have read, don't renegades just miss out on a few emails and cameo's...all very small content wise.

The cameos are small, the only one that actually annoys me is the council one but even tho its only small things is important because its acknowledgement of your past decisions. That these things actually matter and you did actually do something. It's definitely  not rage worthy but it is slightly annoying.

Modifié par Manic Sheep, 11 mai 2011 - 01:47 .

[Golden Owl]

AK404 wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

Some renegade decisions are actually the best way to go.  Examples include Mordin's LM, Miranda's LM, Grunt's LM (all interrupts), and Thane's LM (first Renegade option makes the interrogation go by FAST).  The rationalization for the genophage is classified as Renegade as well, though the reasoning behind it is very good.

I think what bugs some people is that Renegade decisions are either http://tvtropes.org/...upidEvil]Stupid Evil[/url] or so obviously stupid that it falls beyond evil and into childishness.

So why the big wanna take it on on Paragons though?

[lolwut666]

I like playing Renegade characters a lot better than a Paragon ones, and I don't whine about not getting the same amount of perks.

[lolwut666]

Manic Sheep wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

tjzsf wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

I'm rather sick of it myself....would like to see rich play content for both sides personally, but don't get why some people seem so hell bent on punishing paragons.

Because there are quite a few instances where being a "jerk" can the logically sound thing to do, but never any instances where being nice when you shouldn't have came back to bite you.
IOW, because paragons are never punished, while renegades are always punished, which is bad because we presumably like this game for averting "stupid evil" and "good is dumb".

As far as I'm aware and have read, don't renegades just miss out on a few emails and cameo's...all very small content wise.

The cameos are small, the only one that actually annoys me is the council one but even tho its only small things is important because its acknowledgement of your past decisions. That these things actually matter and you did actually do something. It's definitely

not rage worthy but it is slightly annoying.

That's because Renegades killed the would be cameos in ME1.

[Golden Owl]

Manic Sheep wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

tjzsf wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

I'm rather sick of it myself....would like to see rich play content for both sides personally, but don't get why some people seem so hell bent on punishing paragons.

Because there are quite a few instances where being a "jerk" can the logically sound thing to do, but never any instances where being nice when you shouldn't have came back to bite you.
IOW, because paragons are never punished, while renegades are always punished, which is bad because we presumably like this game for averting "stupid evil" and "good is dumb".

As far as I'm aware and have read, don't renegades just miss out on a few emails and cameo's...all very small content wise.

The cameos are small, the only one that actually annoys me is the council one but even tho its only small things is important because its acknowledgement of your past decisions. That these things actually matter and you did actually do something. It's definitely  not rage worthy but it is slightly annoying.

Fair enough....slight annoyence makes a lot more sense than raging.

[Manic Sheep]

lolwut666 wrote...

Manic Sheep wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

tjzsf wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

I'm rather sick of it myself....would like to see rich play content for both sides personally, but don't get why some people seem so hell bent on punishing paragons.

Because there are quite a few instances where being a "jerk" can the logically sound thing to do, but never any instances where being nice when you shouldn't have came back to bite you.
IOW, because paragons are never punished, while renegades are always punished, which is bad because we presumably like this game for averting "stupid evil" and "good is dumb".

As far as I'm aware and have read, don't renegades just miss out on a few emails and cameo's...all very small content wise.

The cameos are small, the only one that actually annoys me is the council one but even tho its only small things is important because its acknowledgement of your past decisions. That these things actually matter and you did actually do something. It's definitely

not rage worthy but it is slightly annoying.

That's because Renegades killed the would be cameos in ME1.

See Deans post, there is no reason to make Cameos out of to kill or not to kill characters and there are other characters that could have been alternatives. As for the council, I don’t care if the new council was bland and unhelpfull. I’m not expecting each character you kill to be replaced by better ones or something but that we didn’t see or hear from them at all was annoying.

Modifié par Manic Sheep, 11 mai 2011 - 01:55 .

[lolwut666]

Saphra Deden wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

I like playing Renegade characters a lot better than a Paragon ones, and I don't whine about not getting the same amount of perks.

You sure like to whine about people whining though.

Sorry, I don't speak troll.

[Saberchic]

I like playing Renegade, and I don't care about the "missing" cameos. If you kill someone, that interaction that you might have had with them simply won't be. That doesn't mean that there needs to be another person to fill that void. That's just filler to me that's completely unnecessary. There's no "missing" content. If you performed a renegade action and death is the result, it's over. There shouldn't be any more.

Like others on here, I would like to see both Paragon and Renegade decisions take a hit. There are times when I'm playing Paragon that I just groan in frustration because I feel that Paragon Shep is just being straight ridiculous. There are definitely chances they gamble on that I think they shouldn't and hope that it will bite them in the behind. On the other hand, sometimes Renegade Shep's actions are so logical, I wonder why they're considered "Renegade."

[tjzsf]

Golden Owl wrote...

tjzsf wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

I'm rather sick of it myself....would like to see rich play content for both sides personally, but don't get why some people seem so hell bent on punishing paragons.

Because there are quite a few instances where being a "jerk" can the logically sound thing to do, but never any instances where being nice when you shouldn't have came back to bite you.
IOW, because paragons are never punished, while renegades are always punished, which is bad because we presumably like this game for averting "stupid evil" and "good is dumb".

As far as I'm aware and have read, don't renegades just miss out on a few emails and cameo's...all very small content wise.

They miss out on quite a bit more content than that, as quite a few people a renegade might have decided to kill just to be on the safe side back in ME1 are the ones who give out sidequests in ME2. Even though, as others have said, that those same sidequests can just as easily be given by other characters, so that being a renegade doesn't give you less content than being a paragon, but difference being that the quest-giver is a lot colder to/wary of you if you are a renegade.

People wanna take it on paragons because they do want their actions to have consequences. They just don't want renegade to be the only side the bad consequences happen to. At the moment there is exactly 1 Paragon action I can think of that actually had me going "huh. crap. shouldn't have done that", and that is believing Eclipse merc Elnora that she didn't kill anyone on Samara's recruitment mission. Yes, there are more renegade interrupts that make the fights easier, but those don't seem to really influence the plot - not tazing that Blue Sun sarge doesn't have nearly the amount of future continuity nods as, say, not killing Shi'ala.

Again, the issue is that either only renegades get the shaft, or they get the lion's share of the shaft. You can fix this by removing the shaft - but who wants that, right? Or you can fix it by giving more of the shaft to the paragons as well.

[Golden Owl]

tjzsf wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

tjzsf wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

I'm rather sick of it myself....would like to see rich play content for both sides personally, but don't get why some people seem so hell bent on punishing paragons.

Because there are quite a few instances where being a "jerk" can the logically sound thing to do, but never any instances where being nice when you shouldn't have came back to bite you.
IOW, because paragons are never punished, while renegades are always punished, which is bad because we presumably like this game for averting "stupid evil" and "good is dumb".

As far as I'm aware and have read, don't renegades just miss out on a few emails and cameo's...all very small content wise.

They miss out on quite a bit more content than that, as quite a few people a renegade might have decided to kill just to be on the safe side back in ME1 are the ones who give out sidequests in ME2. Even though, as others have said, that those same sidequests can just as easily be given by other characters, so that being a renegade doesn't give you less content than being a paragon, but difference being that the quest-giver is a lot colder to/wary of you if you are a renegade.

People wanna take it on paragons because they do want their actions to have consequences. They just don't want renegade to be the only side the bad consequences happen to. At the moment there is exactly 1 Paragon action I can think of that actually had me going "huh. crap. shouldn't have done that", and that is believing Eclipse merc Elnora that she didn't kill anyone on Samara's recruitment mission. Yes, there are more renegade interrupts that make the fights easier, but those don't seem to really influence the plot - not tazing that Blue Sun sarge doesn't have nearly the amount of future continuity nods as, say, not killing Shi'ala.

Again, the issue is that either only renegades get the shaft, or they get the lion's share of the shaft. You can fix this by removing the shaft - but who wants that, right? Or you can fix it by giving more of the shaft to the paragons as well.

It just strikes me that a select group of loud people are hell bent on punishing paragons, because they simply don't like paragons, thats the one that REALLY irks me...(no I'm not pointing my finger at you)...As I have stated on a number of occasions, I want to see equally rich play for both sides, but that doesn't need to come down to punishments and rewards, just different game plays and outcomes.

[tjzsf]

Golden Owl wrote...
[snip for brevity]

It just strikes me that a select group of loud people are hell bent on punishing paragons, because they simply don't like paragons, thats the one that REALLY irks me...(no I'm not pointing my finger at you)...As I have stated on a number of occasions, I want to see equally rich play for both sides, but that doesn't need to come down to punishments and rewards, just different game plays and outcomes.

Ah. I haven't been playing this nearly enough (just got ME1 like two weeks ago), which is probably why my opinions haven't been flanderized as such. I fully expect to become some extreme of "PARAGONS ARE AWESOME! RENEGADES ARE IDIOT DOUCHES!" or "RENEGADES KICK ASS! PARAGONS ARE SANCTIMONIOUS ******!" in a few months. Though I think, in a sense, different gameplays and outcomes *are* rewards/punishments, at least when one style gets you less than the other. Although, while extremists are irksome, you do have to admit those
extremely vocal renegade players do have their counterparts among paragon
players, namely those who advocate "it's a consequence. deal with it."
when their alignment more or less means they never have to "deal with
it."

tbh I think we'd just like at least one instance where being paragon resulted in a net loss to galactic safety, instead of a net gain like it seems to always do - like, if the rachni queen turns out to be lying to you after all (she'd still logically help out against the Reapers, as the latter are a threat to all organics, but you'd have to clean up the mess later). And more where there's not a clear good choice, and it just depends on what your values prioritize - like the end of Bring Down the Sky (save the hostages? or bag the terrorists?).

[Dean_the_Young]

lolwut666 wrote...

In a game that is all about making allies to fight a common threat, do you really expect to be rewarded for being a jerk?

What a bunch of whiners.

The irony is not above you, I hope.

[AquamanOS]

Seeing as Renagade Shepard's probably don't care much about random people they meet only for a short while, missing cameos probably would be considered a perk. Less people to annoy them.

[lolwut666]

@Dean_the_Young

There's no irony. All I did was call the likes of you out on your stupidity.

If you gotta call that whining to feel less miserable about yourself, more power to you.

[Ultai]

www.youtube.com/watch

I wish this was the case.

However the binary morality system really doesn't allow it, grey is more interesting than black and white.  That said, they're not asking for "punishment", they asking for consequences, which I'm all for.  Bad things happen to good people needs to start showing it's face around in ME.

[Dean_the_Young]

lolwut666 wrote...

@Dean_the_Young

There's no irony. All I did was call the likes of you out on your stupidity.

If you gotta call that whining to feel less miserable about yourself, more power to you.

Oh, no, not at all. I can feel less miserable about myself by plenty other means, like personal relativism. All I have to do is compare myself to you, and I'm generally in a better mood for some time.

You, ma'am, are a wonder for people with low self-esteem.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 11 mai 2011 - 03:34 .

[Dave of Canada]

You're given a choice:
Do the right thing and put the mission at risk.
Complete the mission by throwing morals on the wayside.

What should happen:
Paragon choices should hinder the mission, you're doing the right thing at the cost of the mission. Renegade ones should be able to complete the mission, knowing they had to sacrifice to get them.

What is happening:
Paragons save people, complete the mission and everybody pats them on the back and they get equal reward to the Renegade. The Renegade sacrifices their morals, completes the mission, everybody scolds them and they get either: the same reward as the paragon or they get punished with less dialogue / scenes / friends / whatever.

In addition to this, to the Renegades who didn't want the scars had to spend lots of resources to fix it. A paragon had to do nothing, they just simply were. Meaning we had to spend more credits, resources and fuel to fix the scars.