904 réponses à ce sujet

[DarthSliver]

mcsupersport wrote...

So far what have the Renegades lost but a few emails and a few Cameos?? Sure punish the paragons but you also have to get after the Renegades as well, meaning maybe severe punishment for killing council, ie executed for murder sometime at the end of ME3, or some such. Why should you basically killing or being "expedient" be rewarded more than being Morally "Just".


So far their hasn't been much in the way of huge consequences for either other than a flavor of the story change. So what is the big deal, play the way you want and get the feel from the game you want.

They also forget about Knights of the Old Republic, StarForge. I felt it was much easier to get to Malak with my Jedi Revan over Sith Revan. Because if i inherent  the Dark Side again, I kill my two Jedi team members and some other goodie tooshu's. Leaving me with HK-47 and Cand Ordo, maybe the Wookiee if I played the conversation right. But the point is going full Dark Side made me lose a signicant amount of help that was quite useful. Its still possible to beat but I am down the extra help that wouldve lifted pressure of my endgame fight. 

So back to Mass Effect, if i am a A-hole and make reckless Renegade choices like killing that one guy or what not. Do you really expect to see them again? I mean I was intentionally offing them and/or being rude to them purely, its not logical for me to see them again.  They arent going to make it impossible for Renegades to win, just Renegades have to work a bit more because they killed the Council and let the Rachni finally be extinct. 

Paragon - Light Side
Renegade - Dark Side

Its sorta setup in that manner but going full Renegade wont hurt you as much as it did when going full Dark Side in Kotor.

[Jzadek72]

Problem is, renegade is set up to be a ruthless soldier, and, unfortunately, realistically ruthlessness tends to profit. Playing paragon should bring tribulations, but at the end of the day, you can know that you did the right thing.

[DarthSliver]

Jzadek72 wrote...

Problem is, renegade is set up to be a ruthless soldier, and, unfortunately, realistically ruthlessness tends to profit. Playing paragon should bring tribulations, but at the end of the day, you can know that you did the right thing.

Well I do think Renegades should get a plus with Cerberus, assuming they went full and saved the Collectors Base. So in turn like some theorized, its all a ploy on TIM part so you can gather the Allies and bring back a giant mixed Fleet to destroy the Reapers. 

I also agree that Renegades shouldnt have to really deal with Rachni Husk since a full Renegade wouldve wiped them out. If you didnt than you obviously get to deal with an extra set of Husk types.

But as for a negative for Renegades i can see the Trial going against Shepard before the Reapers start attacking and a verdict is determined type thing. But that one might be a stretch because we gotta remember the Trial goes whether you played Arrival or not and if you didnt play Arrival it wont be marked against you from what i can tell.

[AlphaDormante]

It seems to me that people are blurring the line between "punishment" and "consequences".

Look at this from a metagaming perspective. A punishment is a response meant to actively discourage someone from making certain decisions. It is an aggressive response that is intended to evoke change. A consequence, by contrast, is passive. It's not meant to change anything. Consequences can be good and they can be horrible, but the fact of it is, as long as they follow a logical procession? You can't complain. A character might be trying to punish you, but the developers are just establishing continuity.

Now, a punishment? It would be a situation that served no purpose in continuity and was simply there to heckle you for a decision you made. Take al-Jilani for example; talking to her every time was like, what the hell are you talking about you weren't even there. She purposely tries to make you feel bad about a situation that she had no personal/emotional involvement in. What actually keeps her from being a punishment on the players is the fact that one, she's a gag character, and two, she needles the player no matter what decision they made. If she only targeted you for certain decisions, you can bet your hiney I'd be roasting marshmallows over in your guys' camp.

tl;dr: Unless the "punishment" in question flew in out of nowhere and has no logical connection to continuity, it's not a punishment. It's a consequence.

[M-Sinistrari]

AlphaDormante wrote...

tl;dr: Unless the "punishment" in question flew in out of nowhere and has no logical connection to continuity, it's not a punishment. It's a consequence.

I wholeheartedly agree with your points made.  For a very long time people have been confusing punishment with consequence and missing the point of consequences are going to be different according to one's choices.

It makes no sense for renegade choices to result in paragon consequences and vice versa.

I do wonder if this perception's a generational thing since I've seen the younger set at work insist they're being punished by a smaller paycheck when they've called in and not used sick time.  That the smaller paycheck is a consequence of not using a sick day that would've paid that day's wages just doesn't seem to register.

[Whereto]

Ive come to think of it as more of a right choice and hard choice system. Paragon is the choice that is more beneficial and rengade treat people like crap thus get crap. Sure in real life this isn't always the case but in the game world it is.

[Alpha-Centuri]

Renegades have had benefits in ME2 that Paragons lacked as well.

They press the little red button, they get a half-life airship for Garrus.

Kill Vido, don't have to worry about a check to keep Zaeed in line.

Kill Elnora, tie a ribbon around the case of the murdered volus (and not look stupid like paragons do in the process)

Have the shortest interrogation ever (If you chose Anderson in ME1 to give you back your Spectre status)

Shoot the tank, and kill the monologuing Krogan, making the fight easier.

You punch Al-Jilani. Emotional satisfaction. (Or you renegade talk to her, and the speech is WAY better).

I think Bioware has actively tried to balance out both Para and Rene, but it has to be admittedly hard to allow someone to kill everyone, threat or no threat (and sometimes allies if you purposefully got Kal'Reegar killed), and actually be rewarded. You don't get cameos, because the people died. What would you actually have them do?

The cost-benefit imo goes like this:

Renegade= Easier fights, people dislike you.
Paragon = Harder fights, people like you.

Modifié par Alpha-Centuri, 11 mai 2011 - 01:43 .

[WizenSlinky0]

Alpha-Centuri wrote...

Kill Elnora, tie a ribbon around the case of the murdered volus (and not look stupid like paragons do in the process)

I refused to reload as a Paragon even though that drove me nuts to find that out.

On every other playthrough though she gets shot.

[Evercrow]

I'm not exactly keen on "punishing" word. Only choice I see as possible screw up is rewriting heretics and returning them to the fold. Besides, i think CH said that they more of rewarding each side,not punishing(and hell, i think my paragon Shep missed some cool stuff, read Xbox world magazine thread)

AquamanOS wrote...

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.

This. I don't need to see some petty random people giving my renegade spare change from their pockets. What I need  is for them to realize - sh*t gonna hit the fans soon, and they better start preparing for it. I kinda liked that change in atmosphere, with galactic news about increased military productions, people generally suspicious and all.. 
Though if paragons more of people's person- love meeting cameos and pat themselves on the back,maybe getting some gratitude stuff and creds; renegades should be more combat-oriented - maybe acess to the black market in stores, or couple of shady offers on the side(again, with reward which helps in combat,like some new gun) . Actually, if they had done interrupts more points-based(with checks,like persuasions), then being renegade could easily pay for itself : combat-oriented renegade make life for itself easier by starting fights in more advantageous position.

Golden Owl wrote...

I think what would be very helpful
also is having Sheps dialogue better match the offerings on the wheel, I
found a number of times, that what he says is quite far off of what the
wheel wording suggests and to be honest, I know I would probably have a
much more complex and involved game play...maybe even not quite so much
paragon...if I had a better idea of exactly what I was activating...if
BW does that, then the wheel options would be best not represented as
top = paragon....bottom = renegade. This would have I think a dramatic
effect on charm/intimidate options and such things as you
suggested....Collector Base on the neutral line, would make us all think
much more deeply about the possible consequences of our actions and
words.

ha, when i first seen the CB choice i've got confused - always thought that trusting and taking risk was paragon attribute , and what a surprise - reversed situation(if not for the crew's bashing, i would've leaved the base intact).Well, we will see how that plays out.

I think, the biggest punishment for paragons would be more humans lives lost overall,similar to ME1 ending.
And maybe some post-war problems with Rachni , Krogans or Geth(similar to siding with Harrowmont in DA:O).

Modifié par Evercrow, 11 mai 2011 - 02:07 .

[Golden Owl]

AlphaDormante wrote...

It seems to me that people are blurring the line between "punishment" and "consequences".

Look at this from a metagaming perspective. A punishment is a response meant to actively discourage someone from making certain decisions. It is an aggressive response that is intended to evoke change. A consequence, by contrast, is passive. It's not meant to change anything. Consequences can be good and they can be horrible, but the fact of it is, as long as they follow a logical procession? You can't complain. A character might be trying to punish you, but the developers are just establishing continuity.

Now, a punishment? It would be a situation that served no purpose in continuity and was simply there to heckle you for a decision you made. Take al-Jilani for example; talking to her every time was like, what the hell are you talking about you weren't even there. She purposely tries to make you feel bad about a situation that she had no personal/emotional involvement in. What actually keeps her from being a punishment on the players is the fact that one, she's a gag character, and two, she needles the player no matter what decision they made. If she only targeted you for certain decisions, you can bet your hiney I'd be roasting marshmallows over in your guys' camp.

tl;dr: Unless the "punishment" in question flew in out of nowhere and has no logical connection to continuity, it's not a punishment. It's a consequence.

Very well said.

[ReallyRue]

I'd like it if Paragon and Renegade had some negative consequences for the risks they take, like with the Renegade decision about the Collecter base and the Paragon decision about the Rachni.

[Xeranx]

Wulfram wrote...

I don't think Renegades are inherently any more pragmatic than Paragons. They generally seem to assume that being a jerk to everyone and killing anyone who gets in their way will always work out great.

Having said that sensible consequences for decisions are good, whether those decisions are blue or red, and whether those consequences are good or bad.

Which is why we shouldn't have had a light or dark side meter at all and none of the choices should have been highlighted in any color (think DA:O).  

[Dave of Canada]

Alpha-Centuri wrote...

You don't get cameos, because the people died. What would you actually have them do?

Killed Shiala? Have Liz show up instead of random nameless NPC.
Killed the Rachni Queen? Have a scientist from the laboratory show up and mention it.
Killed the team in Bringing Down the Sky? Have the lone survivor (forget his name) message you.
ect ect

You're not restricted with cameos from the alive person, lots of cameos can be done with a Renegade. They could simply have been a news broadcast too.

[Barquiel]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Killed Shiala? Have Liz show up instead of random nameless NPC.

Renegades don't even deserve that random nameless NPC. Be happy with what you've got

[Ultai]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

To take an example, I strongly dislike the Rachni Queen ambassador cameo setup. Not, to clarify, that it isn't good for the Paragons... but because there's no equivalent for the Renegades, even though it would have been painfully simple to do so. Simply a stand in, perhaps some similar no-name from Noveria, who stands by to thank us for our prior help in saving the galaxy from the Rachni breakout. It doesn't even have to be a Noveria corporate suite: it could be some Krogan who lost his father in the Rachni Wars, and he wants to shake Shepard's hands and perhaps offer a trinket of thanks. That's neither hard to write up, nor does it counter the overriding benefit of saving the Rachni (a later ally in ME3).

The Rachni Ambassador cameo is flawed on the basis that there is no reason in that sort of scenario why we can't have alternative cameos to reflect the other side of choices we make.

That one Volus on Noveria comes to mind, can't remember his name.  He'd make a decent replacement, although I think he sends an email regardless so I guess that takes up his cameo quota.

[Seboist]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Alpha-Centuri wrote...

You don't get cameos, because the people died. What would you actually have them do?

Killed Shiala? Have Liz show up instead of random nameless NPC.
Killed the Rachni Queen? Have a scientist from the laboratory show up and mention it.
Killed the team in Bringing Down the Sky? Have the lone survivor (forget his name) message you.
ect ect

You're not restricted with cameos from the alive person, lots of cameos can be done with a Renegade. They could simply have been a news broadcast too.

That's what I've been saying for ages. There's plenty of logical "replacement cameos" that could have appeared.

Here's some more,

Killed Rana? Have one of Kirahee's men spying on Okeer.
Killed Gianna? Have Matsuo show up.

And for the most important replacement cameo that should have been added and it's omission was inexcusable,

Killed Council? Have human dominated council show up.

Seriously, there's no good reason why they shouldn't have shown up. This new council would have logically also appeared in ME3.

Modifié par Seboist, 11 mai 2011 - 07:48 .

[PMC65]

Nimrodell wrote...

They actually did sort that out in DA2 - when it comes to character development and tone he/she takes. You can sound kind and diplomatic but make renegade decisions and also vice versa. So, you can be honest, honorable badass or sleezy, rotten to the core sweet talker...  there are many possibilites there for your own character development without being stuck by gathering para/rene points. Your main tone determines how your character will speak, it manages some special options when it comes to charming/intimidating  but it doesn't confine you to limits of para/rene obvious manners, interaction with others in most cases doesn't affect decisions you'll make.

I am starting DA2 this weekend ... Now I am really looking forward to it! Thanks!

[Xeranx]

PMC65 wrote...

Nimrodell wrote...

They actually did sort that out in DA2 - when it comes to character development and tone he/she takes. You can sound kind and diplomatic but make renegade decisions and also vice versa. So, you can be honest, honorable badass or sleezy, rotten to the core sweet talker...  there are many possibilites there for your own character development without being stuck by gathering para/rene points. Your main tone determines how your character will speak, it manages some special options when it comes to charming/intimidating  but it doesn't confine you to limits of para/rene obvious manners, interaction with others in most cases doesn't affect decisions you'll make.

I am starting DA2 this weekend ... Now I am really looking forward to it! Thanks!

Just want to temper your enthusiasm a bit.  It's not really like that.  I was surprised how well the diplomatic and sarcastic responses worked with each other, but when you use the other one you often find Hawke speaking in terms that don't necessarily jive with the way you want him/her to speak.  At least that's been my experience.

Barquiel wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Killed Shiala? Have Liz show up instead of random nameless NPC.

Renegades don't even deserve that random nameless NPC. Be happy with what you've got [smilie]http://social.bioware.com/images/forum/emoticons/tongue.png[/smilie]

I have to agree. That action was evil (and people talked about Ashley killing Wrex when she's told to be prepared <_<).  I'm not happy they left her out of the PS3 version.

Modifié par Xeranx, 11 mai 2011 - 08:35 .

[PrinceLionheart]

Honestly I'm of the belief where even if paragons were to be punished, renegade players will still find some reason complain.

Honestly, I keep hearing that Renegade Players have been punished, but the more I think about it, that's a complete lie. Outside of a couple of dead NPCs not being cameos, the closest thing to a punishment is the turian shop owner becoming a racist. We don't even know why Cerberus have become antagonist in the third game, and claiming that it's because Bioware is biased against renegades is nothing but a reslt of your delusional persecution complex.

/rant

But seriously, if the scans are anything to go buy, some of the Rachni will end up manipulated by the Reapers. I'd imagine healing the Krogan will also lead to renewed conflict between the Krogan and Salarians.

[008Zulu]

Ryzaki wrote...

...I want to see some renegade and neutral punishments.

Since we're gonna punish people for how they play the game.

Odds are the trial might bring up past renegade actions. Killing the civillians on Feros, Killing the scientists under the "confused happy" drug, and so forth. Trials have a habit of making dirty laundry, public.

[tjzsf]

AlphaDormante wrote...

It seems to me that people are blurring the line between "punishment" and "consequences".

Look at this from a metagaming perspective. A punishment is a response meant to actively discourage someone from making certain decisions. It is an aggressive response that is intended to evoke change. A consequence, by contrast, is passive. It's not meant to change anything. Consequences can be good and they can be horrible, but the fact of it is, as long as they follow a logical procession? You can't complain. A character might be trying to punish you, but the developers are just establishing continuity.

Now, a punishment? It would be a situation that served no purpose in continuity and was simply there to heckle you for a decision you made. Take al-Jilani for example; talking to her every time was like, what the hell are you talking about you weren't even there. She purposely tries to make you feel bad about a situation that she had no personal/emotional involvement in. What actually keeps her from being a punishment on the players is the fact that one, she's a gag character, and two, she needles the player no matter what decision they made. If she only targeted you for certain decisions, you can bet your hiney I'd be roasting marshmallows over in your guys' camp.

tl;dr: Unless the "punishment" in question flew in out of nowhere and has no logical connection to continuity, it's not a punishment. It's a consequence.

Problem: less content for doing a renegade action *is* a response that discourages the player from making certain decisions. Especially in ME2, where your exp comes solely from doing missions and sidequests. Killed Shiala in ME1? Now you don't get a sidequest that could have bumped you over another level before the suicide mission.

Yes, the in-game consequence makes sense logically, but the meta doesn't, if we are going with the premise that both paragons and renegades should have access to roughly the same amount of playing experience,instead of one side being given less content for sticking to their alignment.