52 réponses à ce sujet

[SmokePants]

Dragon Age 2 introduced the concept of alignment dialogue. Hawke would react to things dynamically based on the choices the player had previously made. This allowed for Hawke to say things that were correct to the established character, in situations where it might be awkward to break stride and throw a dialogue wheel up. I thought it worked terrifically and I can easily see the system being implemented into ME3.

"But I'd like to." might be just such an example. The kid in the vent, I think they want everyone to see.

[JKoopman]

Il Divo wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

Still a bad example. Securing the beacon and holding it for extraction and transport was Shepard's only reason for being on Eden Prime in the first place. Anything that happens to or as a result of the beacon is of direct concern to the mission. Kaidan/Ashley were getting too close to the beacon and triggering some kind of reaction. Stopping it and pulling Kaidan/Ash back was in the interests of the mission.

Only if you assume that Shepard had a reason to believe that he could get both himself and Kaidan/Ashley away from the beacon, preventing any kind of damage to it. But you yourself said that it's clear that the VS is too close at this point. In which case, all Shepard did was 'sacrifice' himself to the beacon in exchange for someone he barely knows which would fall under paragon.

http://www.youtube.c...EZqGJIbo#t=175s

I suppose that's one way of looking at it, but clearly it's not the only way as I never interpereted Shepard's actions there as him "sacrificing" himself. He simply runs up, grabs them from behind and tries to pull them back, but ends up getting trapped himself. Again, would not doing anything and simply letting what was happening to the beacon go on uninterupted have been "Renegade"? I don't think so.

Il Divo wrote...

JKoopman wrote...

Fair enough. Although a Renegade Shepard is given numerous options for protesting Tali's inclussion in the party before she joins, even if she eventually forces herself in with a "You owe me", so it still allows Renegade Shepards to display some Renegade characterization even if the eventual outcome is the same. So not a particularly good example either.

I'd argue that it's a good example considering Shepard becomes a Spectre and has authority at that point to completely dismiss a Quarian from his vessel which never happens.

*shrug*

I think not dismissing a clearly combat capable character from your party once you gain the authority to do so and being forced to express concern for a lost child and delay the mission while the world falls apart around you are kind of apples to oranges.

Il Divo wrote...

And to follow your logic, since the child dies regardless of whether Shepard did or did not investigate the vent, yours is not the best example either.

That's not the point. The point is that Shepard is being forced to express concern for something that a Renegade shouldn't really be concerned about. This paints him as a Paragon without any input from the player. Now, you can try to argue that Shepard not being able to tell Tali to take a hike after he becomes a Spectre in ME1 is an example of actions being taken (not taken?) outside of player control - and you might be right - but not sending Tali away doesn't exactly paint Shepard as being Paragon or Renegade.

Modifié par JKoopman, 14 juin 2011 - 08:33 .

[Agamo45]

SmokePants wrote...

Dragon Age 2 introduced the concept of alignment dialogue. Hawke would react to things dynamically based on the choices the player had previously made. This allowed for Hawke to say things that were correct to the established character, in situations where it might be awkward to break stride and throw a dialogue wheel up. I thought it worked terrifically and I can easily see the system being implemented into ME3.

"But I'd like to." might be just such an example. The kid in the vent, I think they want everyone to see.

I agree, that was one of the few things from DA2 that I can say were actually positive.