233 réponses à ce sujet

[Bearcut]

I see thread after thread of "I like to be a renegade and bioware hates me."

I don't see why? It would make sense to me that a renegade character would LIKE to be standing alone, against the biggest threat in the galaxy, with true friends and romances few and far between. I mean, if you knew a cold blooded killer who was completely ruthless even with the lives of his own crew, would you be like "Hey man, want to grab a beer?"

Hell no, you'd stay away from them. Doesn't mean you wouldn't be loyal, or wouldn't follow them, but I doubt you'd have much of a friendship going on.

In my opinion, being renegade is it's own reward. You're a ruthless bad-ass who doesn't need nothing or nobody to help you. You stand alone and SHAKE THE HEAVENS. Why do you guys feel that Bioware is punishing you?

[GodWood]

Why not ask in one of the 'countless' "I like to be a renegade and Bioware hates me" threads?
Or better yet read the well constructed renegade criticisms in said threads.

Modifié par GodWood, 15 mai 2011 - 10:07 .

[Bearcut]

*shrugs*

[Banzboy]

*facepalms*

[Insom]

It is a bit railroaded. In a perfect game you would be able to join Cerberus or the Alliance depending on your stance. It's not like it can't be done.

Modifié par Insom, 15 mai 2011 - 10:12 .

[GodWood]

Well my two main reasons would be:

1/ We're cut of extra content that reflect our past choices (unlike paragons)
2/ Paragons make risks to satisfy their moral code and than have everything work out (they get their cake and eat it) whereas renegades take the safer, more pragmatic approach and yet always get the worse outcome.

That's not to say I don't like some of the consequences we have been given (eg, the results of letting the Council die are realistic and believable) it's just that Paragon options should also have just as many 'negative' consequences instead of everything being kittens and bunnies.

[Zemious]

Because you paragons like to come out of the woodworks and pretend your **** is like a fine peice of gold. Is it too much to ask that our decisions get rewards as WELL? Why is paragon the only route that yields good responses? i almost feel bullied by the game, I cant play how I want, lest I get a ****ty ending in mass effect 3.

[Tamahome560]

Because they are soft and weak and can't take consequences of their actions? So much for being badass.

[Bearcut]

Zemious wrote...

Because you paragons like to come out of the woodworks and pretend your **** is like a fine peice of gold. Is it too much to ask that our decisions get rewards as WELL? Why is paragon the only route that yields good responses? i almost feel bullied by the game, I cant play how I want, lest I get a ****ty ending in mass effect 3.

I dunno man, I've played ME2 where I've done total Renegade...

Killed Wrex, Sacrificed the Council, exc...

It honestly didn't change the game, only the story.

[Zemious]

Bearcut wrote...

Zemious wrote...

Because you paragons like to come out of the woodworks and pretend your **** is like a fine peice of gold. Is it too much to ask that our decisions get rewards as WELL? Why is paragon the only route that yields good responses? i almost feel bullied by the game, I cant play how I want, lest I get a ****ty ending in mass effect 3.

I dunno man, I've played ME2 where I've done total Renegade...

Killed Wrex, Sacrificed the Council, exc...

It honestly didn't change the game, only the story.

I think in mass effect 3 you'll (and me) will be missing out on a few things. Seems like a punishment.

[MassStorm]

Because Renegades do not have the choice to become part of Cerberus and enforce the plan for human hegemony. Renegades worked hard for Cerberus and at the end they finished working again for the Alliance chased by Cerberus...WTF!

[Bearcut]

Then how about this...

Have a male renegade
and a female paragon...

or Vice versa.
Personally I already have 5 shepards that I plan to play through ME3 with different choices, just to see how it turns out. And there is at least one more I want to do.

[Zemious]

I can't get through a paragon playthrough. its like someone is smashing my soul with a giant hammer.

[MassStorm]

Zemious wrote...

I can't get through a paragon playthrough. its like someone is smashing my soul with a giant hammer.

I agree i have only 1 paragon playthrough on my total of seven...it's difficult for me too to be paragon

[Bearcut]

Zemious wrote...

I can't get through a paragon playthrough. its like someone is smashing my soul with a giant hammer.

Lol. Well, the only thing I agree with here is Shepard shouldn't be so One-Sided all the time. If anything, you get punished for being BOTH paragon and renegade (everything is greyed out).

For example, in that short scene on Omega, when the Bartender tries to poison you, you can't just go back and shoot the bastard. I mean, even if you are the hero type, hero's get pretty pissed when people try to kill them.

[Edrick1976]

I think some of the Paragon desions we made in the first game will bight us in the ass personaly....

[Leonia]

Thing is, it's not "good" and "evil".. the morality system allows for two different approaches to the same problem and isn't supposed to champion one path as being better than the other. They are supposed to be treated equally, however, in a lot of ways renegades do not get the same sort of attention and love that paragons do. If only one path is favoured by the dev team, why did they bother putting in renegade at all?

Personally I wish the paragades/renegons were given a better deal because they are smart enough to understand that both extreme moral views are highly flawed in their execution. But this is what we get when the light side/dark side system of KOTOR is applied to a setting where polar-opposite philosophies don't truly exist (not in the same way they exist in Star Wars lore, anyway).

Modifié par leonia42, 15 mai 2011 - 10:35 .

[hc00]

Bearcut the reason is because even though renegade choices are the best ones by any thought process you care to apply to the decision, because of the writers they end up being the wrong ones.

IE Kill/Save the Queen; Logically killing her is the only reasonable option. She is the only member of a species that is obviously capable of mentally controlling other species, that as soon as they were discovered immediately waged a brutal and near hopeless war against the other species without any reason or justification. Why would saving a queen who can have a population multimillion strong within a couple of months all of which are literally killing machines, and that has a history of attacking and slaughtering for no reason, be a good idea?

Yet for no reason whatsoever it isa good idea. This is an example of renegades being arse****ed for doing the right thing.  Because now we may end up losing ME3 regardless of what we do, or at least getting a worse ending, because we didnt have the nonsensical Rachni army at our backs.

Add onto that the fact we miss half the cameos because we make sure that a drug dealer is dead, not dealing drugs on omega and claiming to be clean. Its kind of annoying.

Modifié par hc00, 15 mai 2011 - 10:31 .

[Bearcut]

hc00 wrote...

Bearcut the reason is because even though renegade choices are the best ones by any thought process you care to apply to the decision, because of the writers they end up being the wrong ones.

IE Kill/Save the Queen; Logically killing her is the only reasonable option. She is the only member of a species that is obviously capable of mentally controlling other species, that as soon as they were discovered immediately waged a brutal and near hopeless war against the other species without any reason or justification. Why would saving a queen who can have a population multimillion strong within a couple of months all of which are literally killing machines, and that has a history of attacking and slaughtering for no reason, be a good idea?

Yet for no reason whatsoever it isa good idea. This is an example of renegades being arse****ed for doing the right thing.  Because now we may end up losing ME3 regardless of what we do, or at least getting a worse ending, because we didnt have the nonsensical Rachni army at our backs.

Add onto that the fact we miss half the cameos because we make sure that a drug dealer is dead, not dealing drugs on omega and claiming to be clean. Its kind of annoying.

--- We don't know that saving the queen was the right thing to do, yet. It seems that way, but... who knows? Did you play DAO? At the end of the game it goes over what happens due to your choices - and sometimes, what seemed to be the "right" choice at the time ended up being worse for the society you impacted. I think BIOWARE will play it right in the end.

[MassStorm]

And at the end even if you killed the Rachni queen you will have in ME3 a lot of indoctrinated Rachni to kill...nonsense

[AngryFrozenWater]

leonia42 wrote...

Thing is, it's not "good" and "evil".. the morality system allows for two different approaches to the same problem and isn't supposed to champion one path as being better than the other. They are supposed to be treated equally, however, in a lot of ways renegades do not get the same sort of attention and love that paragons do. If only one path is favoured by the dev team, why did they bother putting in renegade at all?

Personally I wish the paragades/renegons were given a better deal because they are smart enough to understand that both extreme moral views are highly flawed in their execution. But this is what we get when the light side/dark side system of KOTOR is applied to a setting where polar-opposite philosophies don't truly exist (not in the same way they exist in Star Wars lore, anyway).

There is also this misconception that some decisions have to be made by renegades. I had a Shepard with great red eyes who refused to turn over the station to TIM. He forced Shepard to work for him (the game gives you no alternative), but that does not mean renegade Shepard is happy working for TIM and it also doesn't mean that renegade Shepard should blindly follow everything TIM wants.

Modifié par AngryFrozenWater, 15 mai 2011 - 11:03 .

[Annoyed Dragon]

Bearcut wrote...

hc00 wrote...

Bearcut the reason is because even though renegade choices are the best ones by any thought process you care to apply to the decision, because of the writers they end up being the wrong ones.

IE Kill/Save the Queen; Logically killing her is the only reasonable option. She is the only member of a species that is obviously capable of mentally controlling other species, that as soon as they were discovered immediately waged a brutal and near hopeless war against the other species without any reason or justification. Why would saving a queen who can have a population multimillion strong within a couple of months all of which are literally killing machines, and that has a history of attacking and slaughtering for no reason, be a good idea?

Yet for no reason whatsoever it isa good idea. This is an example of renegades being arse****ed for doing the right thing.  Because now we may end up losing ME3 regardless of what we do, or at least getting a worse ending, because we didnt have the nonsensical Rachni army at our backs.

Add onto that the fact we miss half the cameos because we make sure that a drug dealer is dead, not dealing drugs on omega and claiming to be clean. Its kind of annoying.

--- We don't know that saving the queen was the right thing to do, yet. It seems that way, but... who knows? Did you play DAO? At the end of the game it goes over what happens due to your choices - and sometimes, what seemed to be the "right" choice at the time ended up being worse for the society you impacted. I think BIOWARE will play it right in the end.

This is just my opinion but I think its a good and bad to save the Rachni queen

My reason for saying this is if you save the queen she will be loyal to your character and have a Rachni army to assist you in the war.


Unfortunatly this also means the Reapers have another species to experiment with meaning new enemies to fight with. (Remember several years has passed when you release the queen from ME to ME3)


If you kill the queen you have no Rachni army to assit you and no altered Rachni to fight with.

Modifié par Annoyed Dragon, 15 mai 2011 - 11:12 .

[Apollo Starflare]

GodWood wrote...

That's not to say I don't like some of the consequences we have been given (eg, the results of letting the Council die are realistic and believable) it's just that Paragon options should also have just as many 'negative' consequences instead of everything being kittens and bunnies.

This.

I think the best way to handle it is to present different negative and postive outcomes to the (at the very least) key decisions depending on how you dealt with the situation. Take the Rachni for instance, I would hope that if you killed the Queen you have one less dangerous species of Reaper creature to fight in ME3.

Or with the decision as to whether or not to keep the base: My hope is that if you chose to keep it you have to face tougher Cerberus troops (or an otherwise 'enhanced Cerberus') but once you take them out of the equation you get access to the data taken from the base and it ends up helping you in a later mission, perhaps even one relating to the civilisation saving, reaper defeating endgame.

[Perfecti0nist]

That's why it's not a good idea to play ONLY Renegade. When it comes to major decisions, I don't stick to a moral path, I pick the smartest choice. I play Renegade, but I usually the best "big" choices are Paragon.

[hc00]

Bearcut wrote...

--- We don't know that saving the queen was the right thing to do, yet. It seems that way, but... who knows? Did you play DAO? At the end of the game it goes over what happens due to your choices - and sometimes, what seemed to be the "right" choice at the time ended up being worse for the society you impacted. I think BIOWARE will play it right in the end.

Could you give me one example of that please?

As I have finished DAO and there was not one thing that seemed like a good choice that turned out not to be.  At least as far as I can recall.