82210 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

JosephDucreux wrote...
My favorite scene for Miranda post-Reaper is her working and succeeding in reversing the effects of indoctrination. She then uses this to try and reverse the husks back into their original form, like Will Smith in I Am Legend (minus the dying alone as a hero part).

As I understand it, indoctrination destroys the brain, albeit slowly. If you're far enough gone, there won't be anything left to recover. That's why I usually speak of a defense against indoctrination instead of a cure.

Also, Husks aren't the result of indoctrination, they are created by the "Dragon's Teeth" and apparently involved replacing parts of the body with synthetic parts. From their behaviour, it's very likely irreversible. I'd find it rather cheap if it turned out to be reversible..

If she's dead, I'd love to see a bad ending where less than 1/10 of the galaxy's population remains, and there are millions of husks with no hope of becoming 'normal' again still aimlessly roaming around. Serves those guys who killed Miranda off right. (You actually had to try really hard to kill Miranda off, so it couldn't be an accident)

All that depending on one team member's death? That's rather not fair if you ask me, from a story design viewpoint. It would be enough for me that you won't be able to use Cerberus resources against the Reapers after you've dealt with them one way or the other. 

Also, referring a post a few pages back, seriously? Ethics in special/covert ops? Do we look like the f**king Peace Corps to you? As it is, special/covert ops are already ethically objectionable due to the nature of most missions, so yeah. Not exactly rocket science. However, there is a line between being selectively ruthless and just being a homicidal SOB/b*tch. I believe that Miranda is completely selectively ruthless.

Agreed 100%. To except covert ops to be "clean" is completely irrational. That's why I've always said that Miranda turning Paragon wouldn't make sense if she's to retain her competence as an operative. "Selectively ruthless" is a good term btw, and sounds very much like Miranda. I want to see that selective ruthlessness in ME3.

Finally, if Miranda is a traitor/indoctrinated in ME3, I'm going to drive around to every single store in the country, flash my badge, and say: "I'm here on government business, and I'm here to confiscate every single copy of ME3 you have due to *insert plausible sounding reasons that involve threatening global security and stability* messages contained within." Then, I'd burn 'em all. You have been warned, Bioware. You have been warned

if Miranda is indoctrinated, I'm going to torture my ME3 DVD to death, slowly, with drops of acid. But Miranda as a temporary antagonist could make a good story if it's done well, for instance if Miranda is convinced that Shepard is a danger because of the Reaper technology implanted in him, either from Lazarus or from the two days he was held captive by Kenson. After all, Kenson was controlled by Harbinger in that cutscene in Arrival. But it should be strictly temporary. If we're forced to kill her - see above torture scenario. Not that I think it will happen.

[MsSihaKatieKrios]

jtav, did you post this pic on tumblr?

[JosephDucreux]

Ieldra2 wrote...

As I understand it, indoctrination destroys the brain, albeit slowly. If you're far enough gone, there won't be anything left to recover. That's why I usually speak of a defense against indoctrination instead of a cure.

Also, Husks aren't the result of indoctrination, they are created by the "Dragon's Teeth" and apparently involved replacing parts of the body with synthetic parts. From their behaviour, it's very likely irreversible. I'd find it rather cheap if it turned out to be reversible.

Agreed 100%. To except covert ops to be "clean" is completely irrational. That's why I've always said that Miranda turning Paragon wouldn't make sense if she's to retain her competence as an operative. "Selectively ruthless" is a good term btw, and sounds very much like Miranda. I want to see that selective ruthlessness in ME3. 

Of course, there are the unsalvageable cases, and there are the salvageable ones. But then again, Miranda probably wouldn't give up on trying to reverse the effects of indoc on the husks/indoctrinated. That woman is one determined chick, I'll tell you that. That's why I love her as much as my wife Miranda (don't tell my wife I said that )

TBH, I absolutely disliked how Mass Effect played out the morality paths. It always felt like the game was forcing you to be either 100% Good Guy Greg/Good Girl Gina (Paragon) or 100% jerkoff (Renegade). I kinda hated how I couldn't play both sides of the morality fence most of the time, and even when I could, it wasn't quite satisfactory. The neutral option was utterly disappointing (I should go), and in all situations, I had to either take the moral high ground (note: the moral high ground is a great place to site your artillery), or be a total p***k. I couldn't come up with some smartassy answer that would straddle the line. Anyways, pertaining to Miranda, I'd imagine she'd be a mix of paragon/renegade, leaning more towards paragon, given how renegade seems to lean towards killing babies just to extract intel. I'm pretty damn sure Miranda could never bring herself to kill a child no matter what, so I'd say Miranda's 60% paragon, 40% renegade.

[Athayniel]

One thing I'm glad for in ME3, if my memory of the Known Features thread is correct, is that there will only be one overall charisma-like stat which determines the availability of both paragon/renegade persuade/intimidate options as opposed to paragon score determinining persuade options and the renegade score determining intimidation options. Proper paragade and renegon playthroughs just got more validation.

[Ieldra]

JosephDucreux wrote...
That woman is one determined chick, I'll tell you that.

No argument from me

TBH, I absolutely disliked how Mass Effect played out the morality paths. It always felt like the game was forcing you to be either 100% Good Guy Greg/Good Girl Gina (Paragon) or 100% jerkoff (Renegade). I kinda hated how I couldn't play both sides of the morality fence most of the time, and even when I could, it wasn't quite satisfactory.

Here's the thing: you can. If you tend towards a balance and your character end up neutral-ish anyway, it won't even cost you in roleplaying. I've made a rather detailed guide for getting all (with minor modding) or all but one or two (without modding) persuasion options enabled.

The neutral option was utterly disappointing (I should go), and in all situations, I had to either take the moral high ground (note: the moral high ground is a great place to site your artillery), or be a total p***k. I couldn't come up with some smartassy answer that would straddle the line.

It isn't that bad. There are Renegade decisions and conversation options which are pragmatic, others where your being angry is absolutely justified, and the interrupts are often tactically reasonable pre-emptive action. The problem is that the Renegade options in the first situations we encounter (Veetor and Mordin first encounter) are of the jerk-ish kind. Here's an (incomplete) list of those I find OK:
*Practically all merchant intimidation options
*Miranda LM: not telling Miranda to speak with Oriana (I never choose that option, but it's OK)
*Miranda/Jack conflict: siding with Miranda (this counts as Renegade for some reason).
*Jacob LM: Leaving Ronald Taylor with a pistol
*Mordin LM: destroying the genphage cure data
*Mordin LM: pre-emptive strike at the Clan Weyrloc Speaker
*Garrus LM: letting Garrus take the shot
*Garrus RM: killing Cathca
*Grunt LM: headbutting Uvenk
*Tali LM: Renegade persuade "Do whatever you want with your toy ships, but keep my crew member out of your political bullsh*t!" LOL. One of my favorites.
*Samara LM: resisting Morinth with the Renegade persuade
*Samara RM: Killing Elnora
*Thane LM: the three non-torture Renegade options in Kelham's interrogation
*Thane LM: the non-torture Renegade persuade of Mouse
*Thane RM: the Renegade persuade option after not pushing the merc out of the window

Anyways, pertaining to Miranda, I'd imagine she'd be a mix of paragon/renegade, leaning more towards paragon, given how renegade seems to lean towards killing babies just to extract intel. I'm pretty damn sure Miranda could never bring herself to kill a child no matter what, so I'd say Miranda's 60% paragon, 40% renegade.

As I disagree with your estimation that Renegade leans towards killing babies just to get intel (see above examples), I'd rather rate Miranda a Renegon, around 60R/40P. I admit it's open to interpretation, but her recommendations are usually more Renegade than Paragon: dismissing any survivors of Lazarus station as expendable, after the crew abduction, recommending to not go after them if you have recruitment options left, selling Legion to Cerberus. No, I can't see Miranda being more Paragon than Renegade.

[flemm]

Athayniel wrote...

One thing I'm glad for in ME3, if my memory of the Known Features thread is correct, is that there will only be one overall charisma-like stat which determines the availability of both paragon/renegade persuade/intimidate options as opposed to paragon score determinining persuade options and the renegade score determining intimidation options. Proper paragade and renegon playthroughs just got more validation.

I would prefer that. Sounds like a good change.

Ieldra2 wrote...
As I disagree with your estimation that Renegade leans towards killing babies just to get intel (see above examples), I'd rather rate Miranda a Renegon, around 60R/40P. I admit it's open to interpretation, but her recommendations are usually more Renegade than Paragon: dismissing any survivors of Lazarus station as expendable, after the crew abduction, recommending to not go after them if you have recruitment options left, selling Legion to Cerberus. No, I can't see Miranda being more Paragon than Renegade.

I think your reasoning is plausible enough, but I personally like the idea of Miranda being able to swing from 60/40 Renagade to about 60/40 the other way. To me, that's the big advantage of how ME's "morality" system works, as opposed to, say, the DA:O approve/disapprove system: it allows party members to have a degree of flexibility, so you can get somewhat different versions of the character depending on your choices.

I've always liked the concept, that you see fairly often in pop sci-fi, of writing paralell versions of a character that vary a lot in certain respects, but who are still basically recognizable in others. So I guess that explains my preference there.

Modifié par flemm, 12 octobre 2011 - 11:02 .

[Athayniel]

I just like that they're not mutually exclusive concepts on the same axis. You can be full paragon and still pull a gun on someone and threaten to blow their brains out. And when the Renegade or Paragon option is well written it is perfectly in character for either flavour of Shepard.

[UserForFun]

I disagree entirely, Miranda is neither Paragon nor Renegade. Miranda is the embodiment pragmatism. She'll asses and analyze the situation, and determine the course with the highest probability of success.

Within the Suicide Mission, the Collectors were proven resourceful and unpredictable, literally tossing one new thing after another towards the -limited- squad. The soldiers under Shepard's command were limited, sending even one squad-member could dramatically decrease the chance of mission succeeding, or cripple their push towards the Collector Base Core. She elected the most logical choice, and put the mission ahead of individuals.

Well.. Now you ponder; Isn't that... Cold? Evil?

No. It is a simplistic mathematical equation; Should the mission fail, the Collectors will continuously pursue their culling of Humans, killing thousands, perhaps more. Sacrifice dozens to save thousands -is- a logical course of action.

Regarding the Lazarus Station, she stated clearly; Everyone else is expendable. Shepard's experience and potential efficiency far succeeded than any scientist or mere soldier. Quality over quantity.

That's how I see Miranda. There is no morality about her, no right or wrong, only failure and success. 

Modifié par UserForFun, 12 octobre 2011 - 12:16 .

[nitefyre410]

Athayniel wrote...

I just like that they're not mutually exclusive concepts on the same axis. You can be full paragon and still pull a gun on someone and threaten to blow their brains out. And when the Renegade or Paragon option is well written it is perfectly in character for either flavour of Shepard.

 \\


Have you seen Shepard  Paragon to the Spectre  in LoTSB when she is holding the hostage. if you have then like myself  the whole "Paragon are pansy"  line is of thinking is disproven with nothing more than the power of words and a "Glare".   

[nitefyre410]

UserForFun wrote...

I disagree entirely, Miranda is neither Paragon nor Renegade. Miranda is the embodiment pragmatism. She'll asses and analyze the situation, and determine the course with the highest probability of success.

Within the Suicide Mission, the Collectors were proven resourceful and unpredictable, literally tossing one new thing after another towards the -limited- squad. The soldiers under Shepard's command were limited, sending even one squad-member could dramatically decrease the chance of mission succeeding, or cripple their push towards the Collector Base Core. She elected the most logical choice, and put the mission ahead of individuals.

Well.. Now you ponder; Isn't that... Cold? Evil?

No. It is a simplistic mathematical equation; Should the mission fail, the Collectors will continuously pursue their culling of Humans, killing thousands, perhaps more. Sacrifice dozens to save thousands -is- a logical course of action.

Regarding the Lazarus Station, she stated clearly; Everyone else is expendable. Shepard's experience and potential efficiency far succeeded than any scientist or mere soldier. Quality over quantity.

That's how I see Miranda. There is no morality about her, no right or wrong, only failure and success. 

 

^ This 

[Ieldra]

You know, UserForFun, that pragmatism results more often in Renegade decisions? Renegade and Paragon aren't exclusively moral concepts, but the Paragon path has a built-in deontogical (principles-oriented) meta-ethic and the Renegade path a consequentialist (results-oriented) one. Miranda is, as you said, results-oriented...

[UserForFun]

Incorrect. First, I'd like to point out that Paragan/Renegade bars are a piece of crap, but is irrelevant to the discussion, simple a remark. Renegade does not get results, and I'll point several examples why.

From a game-point-of-view, if I follow only a Renegade path, I'll get lesser results than a Paragon. Let's begin with major decisions; Saving the colony on Feros ( Paragon ) or annihilating it ( Renegade ). You're given the instrument to ensure that you'll able to save the colony, improving your standing with Humanity, and potential favor/resources of a very influential private company. ( Exo Geni )

If I wipe them out however, I loose all those benefits, and potentially to an extend, loose Alliance support. Since we're at the subject; What possible gain would I have, if I'll kill that Asaari Commando who's now free from the Reapers influence? I can gain however a future, powerful ally. Where's the logical..? Where's the result?

Let's move towards Racni Queen on Noveria. Provided I follow the Renegade path, I annihilate an entire race that could potentially provide assistance against the Reapers, once the circumstances/situation demands so.

Let's switch to Mass Effect 2 or to be more accurate, Legion. By following the Renegade path, I acquire a certain amount of resources from Cerberus Bounty. By following Paragon path however, I gain an opportunity, never before had in 300 years, specifically to examine an active, '' undamaged '' Geth, rather than trusting it to an incompetent faction that has a long history of screwing almost every experiment.

The technological gain, and insight within Geth, as a synthetic race could be.. Colossal. Where's the pragmatism? I can list one-page examples of how Renegade choices are irrational. But it will serve little purpose, three examples shall be enough to dig trough or not.

However, Paragon also suffers from the same condition, afflicting Renegade; Since we're at the Geth, where's the pragmatism in releasing David from the project Overlord. The individual in question will never be normal, since he's beyond salvation why send him to the Academy, when he can still have use, even by giving a mere insight in Geth technology. ( Again, Cerberus long record of failures comes in question, but alas, is better than the alternative )

The damage is already there, offering reprieve is illogical. Find use for him.

Bottom line; Pure Paragon or Renegade do not offer the most results; However.. Paragon choices bring more results than Renegade. The closest thing to pragmatism that we, as players controlling Shepard can achieve, is by mixing.

For the record; I don't care about filling my damn Paragon/Renegade bars, but simple follow the logical path to get the best possible results. And to be really honest, I would love to agree with you..

-Renegade- path should bring results, but no.. Bioware does not offer results to Renegade, instead our Renegade Shepards are turned into murdering maniacs, shooting everything that moves, which is alright, if you want your Shepard to be a lunatic.

So, yes.. Paragon/Renegade is a piece of crap.

However, to return to the purpose behind our discussion; Morality depends on perspective. I cannot asses Miranda as a more '' Renegade '' individual, because she has noble goals. You do more good by shooting someone, then letting him/her go, or by sacrificing one, to save 100.
Sometimes the end justifies the means.

As Mordin said, lot's of ways to do good, sometimes heal people, sometimes execute dangerous people.

Modifié par UserForFun, 12 octobre 2011 - 01:10 .

[nitefyre410]

UserForFun wrote...


As Mordin said, lot's of ways to do good, sometimes heal people, sometimes execute dangerous people.

 

with farming equipment.

[flemm]

UserForFun wrote...

Incorrect. First, I'd like to point out that Paragan/Renegade bars are a piece of crap, but is irrelevant to the discussion, simple a remark. Renegade does not get results, and I'll point several examples why.

No need to beat around the bush, UserForFun... just come right out and say what you think

Seriously, I may not agree on all your points, but I like your approach to discussion.


On the question of Miranda's pragmatism and results-oriented outlook, I think that's true, but only to an extent. It's really only a fragment of what motivates her actions. First of all, she has to define what results are worth attaining, and thereby her worldview. Which is, in Miranda's case, rather idealistic. Perhaps even a bit naive, where Cerberus specifically is concerned.

And then there is the whole question of what ethical/moral limits the character places on getting results. There do seem to be some limits of this type in Miranda's mind. Though perhaps one could argue that there is an element of pragmatism involved in deciding what she considers to be off-limits. 

Modifié par flemm, 12 octobre 2011 - 01:50 .

[Ieldra]

UserForFun wrote...
However, to return to the purpose behind our discussion; Morality depends on perspective. I cannot asses Miranda as a more '' Renegade '' individual, because she has noble goals. You do more good by shooting someone, then letting him/her go, or by sacrificing one, to save 100. Sometimes the end justifies the means.

Being Renegade does not preclude having ideals. It's all about how to get there, not the goal itself (exception: Bioware wrote Renegade as pro-human, which, btw, does fit Miranda). Ruthlessness (which Miranda has selectively as JosephDucreux phrased it so aptly) is an inherent part of the Renegade philosophy.

The problem with the system you mention is well known, but it's not quite what you think it is: Many Renegade options are pragmatic at the time when you make them, it's only that Bioware twists the circumstances afterwards so that the either the Renegades don't get the expected pragmatic benefits, or the Paragons always get the same benefits without the bad side effects. Look at the Rachni queen decision: the Renegade option eliminates the possibility of a new Rachni war. The Paragon gambles on them staying friendly. Given past experiences, what do you think appears more pragmatic at the time when you make the decision? But of course Bioware wrote things to favor the Paragons and the Rachni stay friendly, so those who killed the queen are left with ashes in their mouth and the knowledge they committed genocide for no reason at all. Which would be no problem - after all, you can't always be right - if it didn't appear to be a pattern repeated with most other decisions. 

For that reason I have no problem saying that Miranda is more Renegade than Paragon ("Renegon"). If you calculate consequences as reasonable expectations at the time when you make the decision, then Renegade decisions have a tendency to be pragmatic. It's Bioware's fault to make the universe implausibly reshape itself according to Paragon Shepard's preferences, but that doesn't mean I have to take that fairy-tale universe into account when I make my decisions.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 12 octobre 2011 - 02:02 .

[Xilizhra]

The individual in question will never be normal, since he's beyond salvation why send him to the Academy, when he can still have use, even by giving a mere insight in Geth technology. ( Again, Cerberus long record of failures comes in question, but alas, is better than the alternative )

Wait, so you're saying that because he'll always be autistic, he's completely useless anywhere outside a Cerberus torture den?

The damage is already there, offering reprieve is illogical. Find use for him.

It's not reprieve, it's ending it permanently.

[UserForFun]

By damage, I was not referring to his condition. But to the mental-trauma he experienced while his mind was conjoined with the VI program; He'll most likely never recover from such an experience, he is already broken, beyond repair. By offering him reprieve, by '' sending him to a special Academy '' it would be a waste.

Everything he endured will had been for nothing.. If the damage is already inflicted, focus atleast to materialize and squeeze some results, because alas, there's no way back.

Also, Ieldra; Majority of decisions, the vital ones; Are '' Paragon '' orientated to bring results, both in short-term, and long-term. Only few Renegade choices bring substantial, or has the potential, to bring results; Collector Base, Project Overlord, and killing the Council ( Which... Is proven not-so-good, but still. ) Perhaps there are more, but I can't recall at this point.

As for the Rachni Queen, it's a gamble; However, it's a win/win situation. Back then, Shepard was not aware of the Reapers, thus given the circumstances presented; The Rachni could either become an ally, or attack the Galaxy. By Galaxy = Aliens. Humans are rather isolated, deep within space, and they will have no quarrel with them.

Modifié par UserForFun, 12 octobre 2011 - 03:33 .

[Ieldra]

There is a decided lack of Miranda pictures on this page:

[flemm]

Not as spectacular as some you have recently posted, but still very cool. I like the whole concept, with Afterlife in the background.

[Xilizhra]

By damage, I was not referring to his condition. But to the mental-trauma he experienced while his mind was conjoined with the VI program; He'll most likely never recover from such an experience, he is already broken, beyond repair. By offering him reprieve, by '' sending him to a special Academy '' it would be a waste.

If all you have to go on is "most likely," it's useless for something like this.

Everything he endured will had been for nothing.. If the damage is already inflicted, focus atleast to materialize and squeeze some results, because alas, there's no way back.

It was already for nothing. It was based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the heretic condition, I already dealt with them more thoroughly by rewriting, and even had it succeeded, it would have enslaved a whole species.

[Ieldra]

flemm wrote...
Not as spectacular as some you have recently posted, but still very cool. I like the whole concept, with Afterlife in the background.

Now I wonder....which of my screenshots would you find "spectacular"?

Apart from that, since I'm not playing at the moment, I need to find old shots I never posted. The selection is big but limited.

[Xilizhra]

I wonder if I should start trying to make screenshots... although the only one I've ever really found as one I could potentially do is one where I caught a Cain blast against the Human-Reaper at exactly the right moment.

[flemm]

Ieldra2 wrote...
Now I wonder....which of my screenshots would you find "spectacular"?

Quite a few. That type of comment is just my version of gushing, basically. If you prefer, I could spam a bunch of little hearts next time.

Just not normally my preferred approach

Ieldra2 wrote...
Apart from that, since I'm not playing at the moment, I need to find old shots I never posted. The selection is big but limited.

Well, I appreciate the effort. I try to pitch in occasionally on that front, but I have not been playing long overall, and not at all right now, so I don't have the vast, SB-esque resources that some have at their disposal.

Modifié par flemm, 12 octobre 2011 - 04:40 .

[flemm]

Erf, double post, apologies.

Modifié par flemm, 12 octobre 2011 - 04:34 .

[jtav]

Past squad members have apparently been leading "interesting lives" in Shep's absence.