347 réponses à ce sujet

[Rip504]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Alright then lets start here:
 
The Paragon choice saves much more lives in the battle of the Citadel (based on what we know) without having to sacrifice the Council to obtain victory over Sovereign.... compared to the Renegade/Neutral choice sacrificing the Council and losing more lives to also obtain victory over Sovereign.

Saving a few more random npcs we will never see or meet is not better. Absurd. We disagree about the choice represented here. I say the choice was about Saving/Killing the council. As this is the main part that imports to ME2.
So yes a Renegade (Pro-Human) best outcome is to kill the Alien council while saving as many human lives as possible and then putting humanity in control. How is the Paragon the better outcome for this Shepard? It is not. It is your opinion. I strongly disagree. There is no cannon Shepard. A pro-human Shepard does not benefit the from the "blue" dialog options here. Pro-human Shepard best outcome is in the "red" dialog. This is very true for this Shepard.

Your opinion is not facts. Paragon is not favored,and is not always the best outcome.

  This choice also allows you to meet with the Council (regardless of how they may feel about you) as they grant you Spectre reinstatement with best wishes.  Shepard is also positively supported for his efforts in the game by unique people to the Renegade choice.

An all Human council not backing/talking with a human agent of an anti-alien group(Outlawed in Citadel space.) makes sense to me. The political fallout would be immense and pointless.  There is no benefit to be gained in this situation. I think Bioware did the right thing here. I do not think an all human council should back a human agent working for the anti-alien group. That could have great repercussions.

Spectre status is an aesthetic reward. It means next to nothing. 3-4 lines of narrative,no great benefit over the Renegade. Both are validated In their outcome considering the reasoning behind these decisions.

An all human council restoring Spectre status to a Human agent of an anti-alien group= Bad news.

An Alien council restoring Spectre status is nothing more then a aesthetic  symbol(as Shepard will not be in Citadel Space.)and help strengthen relation between humans and Aliens. Plus you saved their lives,they owe you. A human council owes Shepard nothing.

Both are validated. You are unhappy with the way these choices were resolved. You feel as if the Paragon is favored and is always the best outcome. This is simply not true. It is an opinion,one in which some truth can be found,but not always and only.

Paragon is not always the best outcome for the DA.
Alien Council is not always the best outcome.
We have No idea what the Rachni will do. No Benefit in ME2. Unresolved issue being acknowledge,but left unresolved. Kill the queen=resolution in death. Paragons save her life,she owes you. No one owes Shepard for killing her. Etc. and so

Modifié par Rip504, 25 juin 2011 - 05:52 .

[TheRevanchist]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Please also consider kylecouch, that those Renegade rationales have thusfar always proven to be unnecessary sacrifices... you'd lose nothing by doing the Paragon choice. The ship doesn't suffer, more lives aren't being saved, Sovereign still falls, the Council's no different, all loyalty is still gained, etc. etc.

You don't feel that's an issue... that there's not one time yet where a choice other than Paragon has yielded a more favorable result?

Not really no...I don't think it's a more favorable result...unless thats what my Paragon Shepard thinks it is. My Renegade Shepard? A nessesary sacrifice. It don't matter what some other Shepard does in some alternate universe. Because in my Renegade Shepard's universe...it was the best choice for victory over Nazzara, and there was no other option. My Paragon Shepard might do somthing else, but that don't effect my Renegade Shepard at all, or the universe she dwells in. The idea that Renegade is "cheated" is only true if you think of it that way. Me personally? I don't think my Renegade has been cheated...she simply chooses to do things a different way...a way she thinks is safer and more secure. And weather it actually is or not is irrelevent to her, because that alternative does exsist to her. Her story is a darker and less pleasent story where many people must be sacrificed. Paragon Shepard might have a different story...but thats his business. I don't see Paragons as being pampered...i simply see see it as a different way to experience the story....I don't need "vindication" for my Renegade personally...because FemShep believes her path is right and thats all that matters. I simply see the game differently...What Moi is saying is that your only being cheated if you think you are....I personally dont...and thus have no problems with the system.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Ah, so you don't view Mass Effect as a game where you have to make a choice... you view it as a game where you can watch alternate Shepards (in alternate universes) play out the same scenario.

That's interesting... and a cool way of thinking... but also incompatible with my arguement and the goal of the game which is to allow players to make decisions that aren't easy.

But cool though, and I enjoyed talking with you..

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Rip504 wrote...

Saving a few more random npcs we will never see or meet is not better. Absurd. We disagree about the choice represented here. I say the choice was about Saving/Killing the council. As this is the main part that imports to ME2.
So yes a Renegade (Pro-Human) best outcome is to kill the Alien council while saving as many human lives as possible and then putting humanity in control. How is the Paragon the better outcome for this Shepard? It is not. It is your opinion. I strongly disagree. There is no cannon Shepard. A pro-human Shepard does not benefit the from the "blue" dialog options here. Pro-human Shepard best outcome is in the "red" dialog. This is very true for this Shepard.

Your opinion is not facts. Paragon is not favored,and is not always the best outcome.

Everyone besides you and your squad are npcs... including the Council... and puts them out of context of the arguement.  In-game, they're not "npcs" they're people and Shepard's a hero.  You say the choice was about saving or killing the Council when the situation was illustrated to be about more than that.  What imported into the sequel... is the issue at hand.

Your pro-human best outcome resulted in the human council being "random npcs we have never seen or met."  Humanity was never demonstrated to be in any kind of real control in ME2.  They don't even acknowledge or respect your role in getting them there.  Politically, there's nothing that even suggests that they're benefiting humanity or doing anything except being left alone as a species to fend for itself.  That's not the kind of rule a pro-human Shepard would want... they don't want an empty office... but that's what they got from what's been shown thusfar.  The Paragon choice becomes the better outcome because not only do nicer things happen for humankind, atleast you get to actually see the Council and they personally support you... you also get increased reparations by the Turians... but only for the Paragon choice.  Humanity is in its best position with the Paragon choice.  With the Renegade choice sparking riots, etc. and no upside to show for it (demonstrated in the game), the Renegade choice (if anything) is pointing toward being overthrown.  A Pro-Human Shepard wouldn't want that.  They could've demonstrated a positive to the Renegade decision.

An all Human council not backing/talking with a human agent of an anti-alien group(Outlawed in Citadel space.) makes sense to me. The political fallout would be immense and pointless.  There is no benefit to be gained in this situation. I think Bioware did the right thing here. I do not think an all human council should back a human agent working for the anti-alien group. That could have great repercussions.

Your whole meeting there is off the record.  They had no excuse for not showing themselves.

Spectre status is an aesthetic reward. It means next to nothing. 3-4 lines of narrative,no great benefit over the Renegade. Both are validated In their outcome considering the reasoning behind these decisions.

An all human council restoring Spectre status to a Human agent of an anti-alien group= Bad news.

It happens... unless of course you personally reject it.  Plus, Spectre status is far more powerful than the human council has been demonstrated to being.  What's the real difference between it and the Alliance?  The Alliance takes on the majority share of forces, the Turians have taken over for the Asari and they're not helping humans... so what are they left with?  Basically, just the Alliance.

An Alien council restoring Spectre status is nothing more then a aesthetic  symbol(as Shepard will not be in Citadel Space.)and help strengthen relation between humans and Aliens. Plus you saved their lives,they owe you. A human council owes Shepard nothing.

It's because of Shepard that the battle of the Citadel was won and the human council was able to assume power.  For all they know, Shepard did it for the noblest of intentions... the neutral choice being that noble intention... no real excuse... and Spectre status is just as powerful as it was before, but the Council doesn't have anything else they can do for Shepard (they weren't any different in ME1).

Both are validated. You are unhappy with the way these choices were resolved. You feel as if the Paragon is favored and is always the best outcome. This is simply not true. It is an opinion,one in which some truth can be found,but not always and only.

Paragon is not always the best outcome for the DA.
Alien Council is not always the best outcome.
We have No idea what the Rachni will do. No Benefit in ME2. Unresolved issue being acknowledge,but left unresolved. Kill the queen=resolution in death. Paragons save her life,she owes you. No one owes Shepard for killing her. Etc. and so

So far I haven't found a scenario where the Renegade choice was a more favorable outcome (be you pro-human or not) because the game did not demonstrate their benefits evenly... the Paragon choice is the choice that was focused on and yielded the most positive benefits thusfar (to everyone... including humanity)...

[Rip504]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Ah, so you don't view Mass Effect as a game where you have to make a choice... you view it as a game where you can watch alternate Shepards (in alternate universes) play out the same scenario.

That's interesting... and a cool way of thinking... but also incompatible with my arguement and the goal of the game which is to allow players to make decisions that aren't easy.

But cool though, and I enjoyed talking with you..

First it was about unequal content. Paragons got it I want it, Then is was Validation,now it is hard decisions. ...?

Some of the decisions are hard. Hence the topics on this site. In your opinion the decisions may not be tough,but Ah yes "Paragons are favored" "We have dismissed these claims."

Also Renegade is the background story of every default Shepard/ME story. Maybe one could argue Bioware favors Renegade. Renegades are not about saving lives and getting positive feed back. That was never the way Renegade was intended to be. Renegades live by their own rules. Shoot first,ask second. A Renegade can be a ruthless leader who does anything he/she thinks is right(or the way they want to)to get their current goal resolved. Without worrying about the galactic feedback.

Shepard:"We have similar rules. (Aria states don't f*cK with Aria.)  Shepard:" I'll stop Saren,you deal with the political feedback.(Said to Udina before taking the Normandy in ME1.) Renegades are meant to be more cold hearted,and live close to the edge by their own rules. Less likely to resolve things peacefully. More likely to run in shooting and kill all of the crazed scientist. Threat eliminated,at the cost of a few lives. The Renegade does not care about. Those few lives were an acceptable loss,to get their mission done.

ME is built on player views and opinions of what your individual Shepard is doing. What was stated about the different Shepards,is true. In a Paragon Shepard's playthrough things are meant to be like this. In A Renegade playthrough things are meant like that. Different opinions for why you are doing something,to obtain your personal best outcome. Bioware does not favor one or the other,they just give you options.

[Rip504]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...


Everyone besides you and your squad are npcs... including the Council... and puts them out of context of the arguement.  In-game, they're not "npcs" they're people and Shepard's a hero.  You say the choice was about saving or killing the Council when the situation was illustrated to be about more than that.  What imported into the sequel... is the issue at hand.

Yes but some npcs hold more meaning then others. Just because they were saved does not make it a better outcome.If you feel that way,maybe you are not thinking in Renegade terms.

The second part was a complete stretch. A Pro-Human wants a Human council period. A Pro-Human does not want Aliens making decisions for mankind. No matter what you say, A Pro-human wants a human council,and considers this the best and only option. An Alien Council does not benefit a Pro-Human,as aSpectre will still be taking orders from Aliens. The Human Council owes Shepard Nothing. Humanity took the council over not Shepard. Shepard didn't hel;p any of them get seated to the council. All he did was kill the ex-council 2 years ago.

Your whole meeting there is off the record.  They had no excuse for not showing themselves.

Off the record. No it wasn't. Maybe not public knowledge,but any and all who deal with the council and potentially Spectres would have to be informed off Shepard's reinstatement. Even other Alien Spectres. So an all Human Council backing a Human Spectre working for an anti-alien group and known enemy in Citadel space,is not a good idea at all.
 Edit: And is a story that is likely to leak.

It happens... unless of course you personally reject it.  Plus, Spectre status is far more powerful than the human council has been demonstrated to being.  What's the real difference between it and the Alliance?  The Alliance takes on the majority share of forces, the Turians have taken over for the Asari and they're not helping humans... so what are they left with?  Basically, just the Alliance.

LoL. The Human Council now controls the majority of Citadel Space. Do you think the Volus can protect themselves from Humanity? What a laugh. Humanity controls the Citadel and trade,only two of the most powerful items in the universe. And countless of other species who would rather stay allied with Citadel laws and etc.

Edit:Plus I want a link to some proof that the Turians have taken control of the Asari,and are not helping humanity. What have they removed theirselves from Citadel Space? I doubt it. They probaly still use Citadel currency etc.

It's because of Shepard that the battle of the Citadel was won and the human council was able to assume power.  For all they know, Shepard did it for the noblest of intentions... the neutral choice being that noble intention... no real excuse... and Spectre status is just as powerful as it was before, but the Council doesn't have anything else they can do for Shepard (they weren't any different in ME1).

? Shepard helped. But it is because of Humanity that battle is won. Shepard just happens to be a part of humanity and the situation. If they were to stop and thank every soldier who was in that battle,they may never get any work done. It was Shepard's order that was responseable for this.But it is not solely on Shepard's shoulders. Humanity put itself their and has had to protect that position for the last 2 years. Spectre Status is an aesthetic symbol at best. It carries no weight nor power in the Terminus system(Where ME2 takes place.) It also grants you absolutely positively no Benefits in ME2.

Rip504 wrote...

You think your gonna run in A spectre.
You think your gonna run in a former spectre.
This does not count as a benefit,as both parties have the exact same outcome.
Even if you wish to mention Liara's dlc. The Asarie Spectre states whether or not you are a Spectre.
No gain,no better outcome,both parties end up in the exact same place with the exact same outcomes,
Spectre status is aesthetic symbol and nothing more in ME2.

Modifié par Rip504, 25 juin 2011 - 08:48 .

[TheRevanchist]

Weellll...there is that one thing with Eliase Khellan where you can basicly make him ****** himself when you use that Spectre intimidate option...but other then that...yea no difference. Agree with all other points. Except I'd like to point out that the Volus use the Turian military to protect themselves.

[Smeelia]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Ah, so you don't view Mass Effect as a game where you have to make a choice... you view it as a game where you can watch alternate Shepards (in alternate universes) play out the same scenario.

That's interesting... and a cool way of thinking... but also incompatible with my arguement and the goal of the game which is to allow players to make decisions that aren't easy.

It could be that the game was intended to be played picking which Shepard you want to see, in which case the game works in the way it's supposed to.  Since your view of the "goal" apparently results in it not working as intended (otherwise you wouldn't have so many complaints), is it possible that you've misinterpreted what it was designed to be?

The game may not be what you wanted/expected but that doesn't automatically mean the designers messed up and made the wrong game.

[TheRevanchist]

^ I like your little "Improbable is not Impossible" I also like "Impossibility is a mind-set"

[Moiaussi]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

In Mass Effect 2, the Rachni promise revenge for those who soured the songs of their mothers/ancestors.  In addition to that, the Asari that gave the message was saved by the Rachni.

And yes, the Rachni were said to have been forced to do it against their will... and likely by the Reapers.  That's what the Rachni wants revenge against and why she's offering to help Shepard.

Yes, the Queen wasn't indoctrinated during the war because she was still just an egg and all her offspring who were produced in the 2 years since ME1 and thus haven't been at risk of indoctrination yet. None of those Rachni were there for the war (other than as an egg). They may all end up just as vulnerable as their predecessors seemed to be and the whole thing might repeat, promises or no promises. Personally I hope the plot doesn't go that way, but we were warned in the discussion with the Queen prior to choosing.

I wonder what your opinion would be if those magpies bashed you for destroying the base instead... it's wierd no matter which side they universally support.

It would be the same. Keep in mind that I feel the same about the 'advice' given by squadmates regarding the Rachni and Council decisions and in playthroughs where I save the Council it is usually because of renegade/tactical logic rather than any knee jerk politicly correct 'moral imperative.' I have been consistant on this.

Anderson's doing it without them being involved... just because the Council can't do anything about it doesn't make it any less of what it was.  The Council didn't want Shepard to have his Spectre status back, while with the Paragon choice, they do.  That's just how it is. 

They are involved. They could still vote it down. They just don't dare. The Council in the Paragon situation say they will but are subject to the same situation but being politicians they realize it doesn't gain them anything to admit that so they act like it is their idea. That is my take on it as it has been all through our past discussions. To be sure of which (if either) is right, we would have to know what they are actually thinking. Short of the Devs telling us, we don't know. In other words, you are completely rejecting the concept that they might be lieing to us as to their intent despite there being no proof of their intent at all. We know they reinstate Shepard, we know what they tell Shepard, we just don't know if they are being honest.

We know that everything we hear in game isn't the truth. Little Eclipse Girl (Ehlona?) lies to us about her innocence. Pitney lies to us about his. Saren lied to the Council. TIM gets caught in a couple lies as well. There is no reason to assume that just because someone says something that they are being honest. They may be but they may also be lieing.

The Council has motive to lie.

And they didn't result in any negative consequence.

I'd call being forced to make decisions that don't feel right to the character 'negative.' YMMV, of course.

You're focused on the fact that they called working with Cerberus treason and not considering the rest of what was said.  You didn't write this either, but all things considered, it's pretty obvious that the Council supports you... just compare it to the Renegade decision's outcome... you don't get Council support with them... and it becomes painfully obvious that they did not have to reinstate your Spectre status at all.

I know I didn't write this either. I have said that I disagree with you but i have not claimed my own interpretation to be 'fact.' Just because something feels obvious to you doesn't mean it is fact. Do you also feel that stage illusion is really magic rather than merely carefully staged to create the appearance of magic? More to the point, do you also believe that politicians never lie or 'manage the truth?'

[lovgreno]

But some self styled "renegades" just love being the victim of "unfair BioWare" and "naive paragons"! I say we can give them that little thing to enjoy.

On the other hand neither renegades nor paragons are realy rewarded or punished in the game... Well I guess this is just another case of seeing things the way you prefer it to be then.

[TheRevanchist]

Exactly...like I've said many times...this game does not make anyone a victim...you make yourself a victim from the way you interpret it.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Rip504 wrote...

First it was about unequal content. Paragons got it I want it, Then is was Validation,now it is hard decisions. ...?

.... I've always been talking about all of those things....  Please pay more attention to what I've been saying if you want to have a real discussion about it.  Nothing you listed in false order is something new...  It's all been about Paragon favoritism and the impact it has on actually having to think about your choice.

Some of the decisions are hard. Hence the topics on this site. In your opinion the decisions may not be tough,but Ah yes "Paragons are favored" "We have dismissed these claims."

They aren't hard by your logic or how the game has been rigged thusfar.  Blue button = best outcome, Red button = scorn button with less content and more lives lost (but because Shepard doesn't care, that makes Paragon not the favored choice?)

Also Renegade is the background story of every default Shepard/ME story. Maybe one could argue Bioware favors Renegade. Renegades are not about saving lives and getting positive feed back. That was never the way Renegade was intended to be. Renegades live by their own rules. Shoot first,ask second. A Renegade can be a ruthless leader who does anything he/she thinks is right(or the way they want to)to get their current goal resolved. Without worrying about the galactic feedback.

Again, the reason why the Renegade backstory was the default is because they skimped on relevant content to Renegade choices (ie. new players wouldn't be as lost).  Both Paragon and Renegades live by their own rules... only one gets their repercussions illustrated by actual... exclusive... content/validation/appearances.

Shepard:"We have similar rules. (Aria states don't f*cK with Aria.)  Shepard:" I'll stop Saren,you deal with the political feedback.(Said to Udina before taking the Normandy in ME1.) Renegades are meant to be more cold hearted,and live close to the edge by their own rules. Less likely to resolve things peacefully. More likely to run in shooting and kill all of the crazed scientist. Threat eliminated,at the cost of a few lives. The Renegade does not care about. Those few lives were an acceptable loss,to get their mission done.

You can explain how Renegades think all you'd like, that doesn't excuse the outcome, lack of content, and lack of positive validation (from any source, it doesn't have to be a char coming up and saying 'thank you').  The story could've explored Renegade actions thusfar with the same amount of exclusive content that Paragons have without having to resurrect anyone.  An upside to making the Renegade choice could've been illustrated... but it wasn't.

Believe me, I understand what you're saying.. but now you should try to understand what I'm saying.

ME is built on player views and opinions of what your individual Shepard is doing. What was stated about the different Shepards,is true. In a Paragon Shepard's playthrough things are meant to be like this. In A Renegade playthrough things are meant like that. Different opinions for why you are doing something,to obtain your personal best outcome. Bioware does not favor one or the other,they just give you options.

They favor one over the other based on the outcome.  If you pick a choice, that's up to you.. but the repercussions of those choices are up to Bioware... and the most positive outcomes have been from Paragon choices... simple as that.  Result of Paragon choice = things are going well.  Result of Renegade choice = things aren't going that well (and there's less content there)... but Shepard doesn't care... so it's just as good.  Sorry, but that's not "equal."

As an extreme example, if the game only lasted 5 minutes in Mass Effect 3 for Paragon decisions but Paragon Shepard didn't care (while Renegade Shepard gets a full 40 hour campaign)... would you still consider that fair... just because Shepard doesn't care?  Think about that.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 25 juin 2011 - 06:15 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

[quote]Rip504 wrote...

Yes but some npcs hold more meaning then others. Just because they were saved does not make it a better outcome.If you feel that way,maybe you are not thinking in Renegade terms.

The second part was a complete stretch. A Pro-Human wants a Human council period. A Pro-Human does not want Aliens making decisions for mankind. No matter what you say, A Pro-human wants a human council,and considers this the best and only option. An Alien Council does not benefit a Pro-Human,as aSpectre will still be taking orders from Aliens. The Human Council owes Shepard Nothing. Humanity took the council over not Shepard. Shepard didn't hel;p any of them get seated to the council. All he did was kill the ex-council 2 years ago.[/quote]

Shepard doesn't relay anything about the new Council holding more meaning than the previous one... actually he says they're the same.  Again, no upside to the choice.  Perhaps the Renegade terms are less "evil" than you think they are.  
 
As for your second part, incorrect.  Shepard hand-picked one of the Council members himself and was there when preliminary planning for the new Council was being set up...  As we know by the different endings, events could've had Humanity as the head of the Council while still including the other races.  Shepard had a very influential hand in the forming of that new Council.  And an alien Council does benefit a pro-human because the other races will have to cooperate in order for humanity to survive.  The Turians and Salarians could destroy humanity if they so chose.

[quote]Off the record. No it wasn't. Maybe not public knowledge,but any and all who deal with the council and potentially Spectres would have to be informed off Shepard's reinstatement. Even other Alien Spectres. So an all Human Council backing a Human Spectre working for an anti-alien group and known enemy in Citadel space,is not a good idea at all.
 Edit: And is a story that is likely to leak.[/quote]

Incorrect, the meeting is off the record.  Shepard's Spectre status has nothing to do with that meeting.  And whether you're Paragon or Renegade, you can become a Spectre... working with an anti-alien group and known enemy in Citadel space.

[quote]LoL. The Human Council now controls the majority of Citadel Space. Do you think the Volus can protect themselves from Humanity? What a laugh. Humanity controls the Citadel and trade,only two of the most powerful items in the universe. And countless of other species who would rather stay allied with Citadel laws and etc.

Edit:Plus I want a link to some proof that the Turians have taken control of the Asari,and are not helping humanity. What have they removed theirselves from Citadel Space? I doubt it. They probaly still use Citadel currency etc.[/quote]

The Volus?  Probably not... could they enlist help from other races such as the Turians, Batarians, or Salarians?  Yes.  Could the Volus's story of "oppression" or dictatorship of the 'Citadel and trade' lead to an alien coup against Humanity?  Absolutely.  Do they have to stand for Humanity?  They most certainly do not.

Regarding the Turians, I never said they took control of the Asari.  The Asari gave up their responsibility of defending the Citadel to the Turians.

Regarding Turians not helping, there's news (emily wong's) of the Turians saying something along the lines of "Humanity has seized power, the responsibility is theirs."  The Salarians also consider some of what the humans are doing being "gunboat diplomacy."  Check the news.




[quote]? Shepard helped. But it is because of Humanity that battle is won. Shepard just happens to be a part of humanity and the situation. If they were to stop and thank every soldier who was in that battle,they may never get any work done. It was Shepard's order that was responseable for this.But it is not solely on Shepard's shoulders. Humanity put itself their and has had to protect that position for the last 2 years. Spectre Status is an aesthetic symbol at best. It carries no weight nor power in the Terminus system(Where ME2 takes place.) It also grants you absolutely positively no Benefits in ME2. [/quote]

Incorrect, Shepard is considered the hero of the battle of the Citadel.  And yes, Spectre status doesn't have as much weight outside of its jurisdiction... but it's a sign of support by the Council (with the Paragon choice) and the best that Anderson can do for you with the Renegade choice.  You can get Spectre status regardless of your choice... so there's nothing there to argue (Council support on the other hand...).

[quote]Rip504 wrote...

You think your gonna run in A spectre.
You think your gonna run in a former spectre.
This does not count as a benefit,as both parties have the exact same outcome.
Even if you wish to mention Liara's dlc. The Asarie Spectre states whether or not you are a Spectre.
No gain,no better outcome,both parties end up in the exact same place with the exact same outcomes,
Spectre status is aesthetic symbol and nothing more in ME2. [/quote]

[/quote]

Read above bold section.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 25 juin 2011 - 07:00 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

kylecouch wrote...

Exactly...like I've said many times...this game does not make anyone a victim...you make yourself a victim from the way you interpret it.

It's not about being a "victim"... Renegades aren't "victims"... but they do get less for their decisions... 

[Rip504]

OMG LOL. I am done. You refuse to see the game is seen from your Shepard's PoV. Bioware has not favored either party. That is your opinion. An alien council does not equal the best outcome. Paragon does not equal best outcome. THAT IS YOUR OPINION ONLY.

A renegade that kills the Alien council DOES NOT pick the human the council.(And 1 member doesn't warrant anything owed by the Human council,maybe an explanation by the one member,but you do get that. So) Humanity takes over. Shepard is the Hero of the battle. But Shepard didn't win it by himself. Stating otherwise is absurd.

A Pro-Human is Anti-alien in some cases. An Alien does not help this Pro-human concept. Why can't you grasp that?
I have seen your discussions. Everytime someone points something out you say it isn't about this it's about validation,no it's about non equal content,no it's about all 3 all this time. Exactly my point. Maybe you need to read. Your Opinion is not fact. No matter how many times you disagree with me. I acknowledge all three. I never said you were not discussing these options. Your Assumptions are also not facts,As you were just wrong. And as long as you fail to see your opinions are not facts the more pointless this becomes.

Shepard's story is told from your PoV. You decide what is the best outcome for your Shepard. Why can you not understand That YOU Prefer Paragon outcomes to Renegade outcomes? Not everyone does. No you do.

Paragons live by Citadel rules,not their own. They share morality on a galactic level. Renegades do not. ME3 being 5 mins for a Renegdae and 40 hours for a Paragon is the most ignorant thing you have said thus far. AS nothing in any of the ME games even hint to anything like this. (Both Playthroughs are equal.) Even if you pick ALL "Blue" dialog in ME1,your ME2 campaign is no longer or shorter then the other. The content is their,Your Shepard deals with it differently. It is not about being equal,validation,hard choice. You are upset with the resolution. I have agreed to more content.

I will not agree with you that the Paragon is better or favored. I think you are mistaken on how the content and morality systems work.

I am done.  After you continue to push an alien council as being the better choice for a pro-human renegade is absurd and shows me you do not understand what I am saying. I remove myself from this topic.. "Paragons are always right and get more content. Boo Hoo." It's not true. The content WOULD HAVE TO BE EXCLUSIVE. It is not. So both parties can have it. Individual choice does not make you A Renegade/Paragon. No it's the way your string together your choice and play style.

Also your argument for Bioware using Renegades as default Shepard is bacuase of the lack of content and it is easier.
Come on really? So they Punish Renegades and new players after stating they would not do this? After the content is created and ready to go,all they have to do is pick which Shepard is default. It is not because of lack of content and it's easier. Renegades have different choices that have to be explained in either case. You are saying they do not use Paragons because of this very issue,but Renegades share this issue as their choices create different outcomes. Bioware simply picked Renegade over their "favored" Paragons.

There is no great gap of content. You ar up in arms over 3 choices. Saying Bioware favors Paragons because of this, is a stretch IMO.

Modifié par Rip504, 25 juin 2011 - 08:32 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

lol your whole "pro-human" concept is an assumption I was playing along with. You're not seriously getting frustrated over entertaining your own idea are you?

And there is a difference between pro-human and anti-alien. I can be pro-American and not be against other countries... you're the only one driving that extreme point home. Renegade Shepard said the human council was "just as bad" as the alien one... does that fit your view of Renegade Shepard? Because that's a fact that is in the game...

Come on now... please fact check before you call the facts I'm presenting opinion... I'd appreciate it.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 25 juin 2011 - 08:54 .

[Moiaussi]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

Exactly...like I've said many times...this game does not make anyone a victim...you make yourself a victim from the way you interpret it.

It's not about being a "victim"... Renegades aren't "victims"... but they do get less for their decisions... 

Lol, so you're not victims, just victimized?

[Moiaussi]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

They aren't hard by your logic or how the game has been rigged thusfar.  Blue button = best outcome, Red button = scorn button with less content and more lives lost (but because Shepard doesn't care, that makes Paragon not the favored choice?)

Paragon often involves saving lives now at a cost of higher long term risk. "Long term' hasn't happened yet. What you seem to be saying is that renegade decisions should be the same as paragon decisions, that hostages should always be saved at the expense of the 'bad guy' getting away, that everyone should be trusted, etc etc etc.

Nevermind that a lot of situations do work that way. Helena Blake can be convinced to go straight either by compassion or fear.

We still don't know the results of most decisions. Vido hasn't been caught, neither has Balak. Just because we don't hear of any crimes linked to them means nothing. Per a news report in ME2, Balak is still at large so the risk that someone might not be there to stop him 'next time' remains.

Again, the reason why the Renegade backstory was the default is because they skimped on relevant content to Renegade choices (ie. new players wouldn't be as lost).  Both Paragon and Renegades live by their own rules... only one gets their repercussions illustrated by actual... exclusive... content/validation/appearances.

Again, you know this is the reason how? Quit pretending that your opinion is fact. BW has a history of dark and gritty storylines. Renegade suits that better than paragon.

As an extreme example, if the game only lasted 5 minutes in Mass Effect 3 for Paragon decisions but Paragon Shepard didn't care (while Renegade Shepard gets a full 40 hour campaign)... would you still consider that fair... just because Shepard doesn't care?  Think about that.

There are only two extra scenes that I can think of, the Rachni representative and Gianna. Everything else is the same length. Not seeing the replacement Council doesn't shorten the scene.

Gianna is only absent if you betray her to Anoleis for no good reason whatsoever. There is no additional reward for doing so, I don't think he even gives you any credits (although if he did, it is not like they would matter). There is no good reason for going to him and doing so other than if you had read a spoiler saying it gives renegade points.

That leaves the Rachni. One scene.

There is finite room on a disc. An additional scene to compensate somehow would have meant needing more space and it would have had to come from somewhere. So should it not have been there at all just to make renegades happy? What other scene should have been cut to make room?

What should have been cut to cover additional voice actiing for the replacement Council?

And does one scene out of how many constitute 'blue is best' other than maybe for that decision?

[Rip504]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

lol your whole "pro-human" concept is an assumption I was playing along with. You're not seriously getting frustrated over entertaining your own idea are you?

And there is a difference between pro-human and anti-alien. I can be pro-American and not be against other countries... you're the only one driving that extreme point home. Renegade Shepard said the human council was "just as bad" as the alien one... does that fit your view of Renegade Shepard? Because that's a fact that is in the game...

Come on now... please fact check before you call the facts I'm presenting opinion... I'd appreciate it.

Lol This is your response? Guess what? Your assumption that I am frustrated, is just another case of one of your assumptions being wrong.

The pro-human in not an assumption,it is a possible playthrough. (You being wrong again.)
That's why I cleared it up for you. A Pro-human who is anti-alien. I did mention this. Read. (You are wrong again.)
Renegade Shepard? Or An All Human Council Shepard.(They are not the same thing. Wrong again.)
A Renegade Shepard can have an All Human council.Duh. So can a Paragon Shepard,So does the Paragon state this also?

When This Shepard was stating the Human Council is just as bad as the Alien Council. The context of the statement was concerning the councils preparation for the Reapers. Nothing Else. So if you take it out of context it can mean whatever you like.(Keep it in context and you are wrong again.)
Even after this is stated,Shepard makes no remark or anything to show regret for his/her decision. As they still feel the All Human council is the best outcome.

Edit:
Also I was making the point that a Pro-Human (Anti-Alien) Shepard considers the best outcome an all human council. It is an opinion. Based on what we have seen in ME2 and ME1. It's not wrong. The game is an RPG,you decide what is best for your Shepard. And you have decided Paragon outcomes are better. Then you should use them. I feel as an all Human council is the best outcome in this situation. An alien council makes no sense for this Shepard. No sense what so ever.

Your entire response is wrong,(In a sense.)Your entire response is nothing more then assumptions & opinions,based off of your views of Mass Effect. Not Facts.

Edit:
All major plot events are still unresolved. So making our agruments revolve around them is kind of pointless.
The other 3 or 4 choices are not a big enough concern to even worry about.(IMO) It defiantly doesn't prove Bioware favors the Paragon. Off of what we have seen in the 2 games. We still do not truly know what the best outcome is,as the story is not finished. I do not personally feel there is enough proof in ME2 to say Bioware favors the Paragon. I think that is a stretch when you base your whole argument on 3 or 4 small choices. None of which concern the main plot at all.

There is a difference between Major and Small plot events. Rachni is not small. It's major and unresolved. Even to base your opinion on what we have seen so far,it is still an opinion open to be wrong until ME3 resolves this
situation. An appearance that hints to future events proves nothing. It does not show Bioware favors Paragons,as both Paragons and Renegades can have the Rachni. There are Renegade dialog options in this conversation in ME2 on Illium. Proving a Renegade can have this encounter.

Modifié par Rip504, 25 juin 2011 - 10:24 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Rip504 wrote...

Lol This is your response? Guess what? Your assumption that I am frustrated, is just another case of one of your assumptions being wrong.

Do you want me to quote you? lol

               

Rip504 wrote... 

                             OMG LOL. I am done. 

That generally means you're getting "frustrated." 

Want a definition of frustrated?  " Feeling or expressing distress and annoyance, esp. because of inability to change or achieve something."

Wrong?  No.

The pro-human in not an assumption,it is a possible playthrough. (You being wrong again.)

Your arguement for a pro-human is an assumption... I've been talking about how you can be pro-human with the Paragon choice and have more positive results displayed by the game because of it...

Wrong?  No.

That's why I cleared it up for you. A Pro-human who is anti-alien. I did mention this. Read. (You are wrong again.)

I read, and again... the anti-alien felt that the all human council was just as bad as the alien one.  That's not something a pro-human, anti-alien would say... especially not about humans...

Wrong?  No.

Renegade Shepard? Or An All Human Council Shepard.(They are not the same thing. Wrong again.)

Only the Renegade choice can result in an all-human Council.  I never said they were the same thing... Wrong?  No.

A Renegade Shepard can have an All Human council.Duh. So can a Paragon Shepard,So does the Paragon state this also?

Again... only the Renegade choice can result in an all-human Council.

When This Shepard was stating the Human Council is just as bad as the Alien Council. The context of the statement was concerning the councils preparation for the Reapers. Nothing Else. So if you take it out of context it can mean whatever you like.(Keep it in context and you are wrong again.)
Even after this is stated,Shepard makes no remark or anything to show regret for his/her decision. As they still feel the All Human council is the best outcome.

Saying they're just as bad as the alien Council is a regretful remark... only a negative jab at them... no positive praise.  Shepard could've easily said "Atleast they're not aliens" or "Atleast they're not the previous council"... But you hear no praise or positive validation toward the all-human council whatsoever.  That content is not there... see the issue?  If you want to use game facts and not opinion... there it is.

Edit:
Also I was making the point that a Pro-Human (Anti-Alien) Shepard considers the best outcome an all human council. It is an opinion. Based on what we have seen in ME2 and ME1. It's not wrong. The game is an RPG,you decide what is best for your Shepard. And you have decided Paragon outcomes are better. Then you should use them. I feel as an all Human council is the best outcome in this situation. An alien council makes no sense for this Shepard. No sense what so ever.

If the goal is just an all-human council, then you could well argue the point... however short-sighted that point is.  But even then, there's no payoff of that choice presented in Mass Effect 2... as you don't even see them.  There's no content to even pay off on that novelty. 

Secondly, Shepard (again) specifically says they're 'just as bad' as the original Council... if your intention was farther-sighted than just novelty's sake and expected an actual change to happen... then that's another backfire for the Renegade choice.  The Alliance is now essentially on its own as they're met with alien resentment and low cooperation... along with rights and feelings of humanity using "gunboat" diplomacy that does not point to anything positive.  So if you wanted humanity in a "better/safer" position, that's another backfire.

Your entire response is wrong,(In a sense.)Your entire response is nothing more then assumptions & opinions,based off of your views of Mass Effect. Not Facts.

Incorrect, I'm only adding the facts of the game up and viewing it from the perspective of validation and benefits for each choice.  It's easy to see that the Paragon choice has the more benefits and validation presented in the game for their decisions.  If you disagree, show me the benefits and validations presented by the Renegade choice.

Edit:
All major plot events are still unresolved. So making our agruments revolve around them is kind of pointless.
The other 3 or 4 choices are not a big enough concern to even worry about.(IMO) It defiantly doesn't prove Bioware favors the Paragon. Off of what we have seen in the 2 games. We still do not truly know what the best outcome is,as the story is not finished. I do not personally feel there is enough proof in ME2 to say Bioware favors the Paragon. I think that is a stretch when you base your whole argument on 3 or 4 small choices. None of which concern the main plot at all.

You're right, all the major plot events are indeed still unresolved... but that has no effect on what's been presented in the actual game thusfar.  Relax a little and think about it.

What would you need to see to feel that Bioware favors Paragon choices in the Mass Effect games up to this point?  What outcomes would make it "better" to you?  Answer that... and we may be able to get somewhere.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 25 juin 2011 - 11:13 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

@ Moiaussi, what do you consider to be long term? Mass Effect 2 really gets going 2 years after ME1 ends.

To restate this once more (with extra words)... this is about more than just the 'have cake and eat too" of Paragon choices, and more than the exclusive content and cameos that Paragon choices provide over Renegade choices, and more than the positive validation given by characters and events in the game (regardless of their standing even minutes before), and more than the lack of any negative events emerging from letting criminals go while the Renegade choice has lead to negative events...

It's about the fact that the Paragon choices become the best option buttons if you want the "best" (okay... apparently that gets interpreted differently by some... so I'll just say "most positive and content-filled") ending... which removes the need to make a difficult choice for the most positive and content-filled outcome (as evidenced by Content).

What's tough about the choice if some of your justifications for the Renegade choice is ~"Well you know Renegades get more difficult situations because Shep likes it"?


P.S.  Regarding why they chose Renegade outcomes for new players in Mass Effect 2?  Lets see what Casey Hudson said about that:

"obviously we needed to make sure it's a game people can jump into knowing nothing about the Mass Effect universe, or even that there was a first game" - Casey Hudson

http://www.pcworld.c...s_effect_2.html

Make of it what you will... but you've got to admit... that's some interesting evidence... given what we're discussing.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 25 juin 2011 - 11:44 .

[Moiaussi]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

@ Moiaussi, what do you consider to be long term? Mass Effect 2 really gets going 2 years after ME1 ends.

To restate this once more (with extra words)... this is about more than just the 'have cake and eat too" of Paragon choices, and more than the exclusive content and cameos that Paragon choices provide over Renegade choices, and more than the positive validation given by characters and events in the game (regardless of their standing even minutes before), and more than the lack of any negative events emerging from letting criminals go while the Renegade choice has lead to negative events...

It's about the fact that the Paragon choices become the best option buttons if you want the "best" (okay... apparently that gets interpreted differently by some... so I'll just say "most positive and content-filled") ending... which removes the need to make a difficult choice for the most positive and content-filled outcome (as evidenced by Content).

What's tough about the choice if some of your justifications for the Renegade choice is ~"Well you know Renegades get more difficult situations because Shep likes it"?


P.S.  Regarding why they chose Renegade outcomes for new players in Mass Effect 2?  Lets see what Casey Hudson said about that:

"obviously we needed to make sure it's a game people can jump into knowing nothing about the Mass Effect universe, or even that there was a first game" - Casey Hudson

http://www.pcworld.c...s_effect_2.html

Make of it what you will... but you've got to admit... that's some interesting evidence... given what we're discussing.

The Rachni haven't provided any tangible benefits yet, nor have any differences in fleet strength resulting from the Citadel battle mattered as there were no fleet actions in ME2. The Council hasn't had to make any meaningful decisions, so we don't know which Council (if any) will be more effective.

The Feros survivors are suffering ill effects that noone can find the cause of. This wasn't immediately true in ME1. These complications set in later.

Vido could have caused many deaths. We hadn't heard of him at all prior to Zaheed, so if crimes we don't hear about after he gets away don't count, then crimes he committed before the chance to take him down don't count either.

Balak is still at large and there is no reason to believe he wouldn't try again. This is especially true after Arrival when he would likely have considerably more mainstream Batarian support.

The Collector Base decision is extremely short term. That one happened at the very end of ME2 and before any crew would have anything to base anything on other than a general distrust of TIM, but the only one who has actually done anything against Cerberus so far has been Mordin (removing the bugs from his lab). Even Tali didn't do that and she is argueably the most anti-Cerberus crew member.

The fact is that we have only seen hints of what might be. ME2's story was too isolated to be affected by ME1. ME3 will involve full scale reaper invasion so pretty much everywhere will be affected.

As for Casey's statement, why would a situation with the Council refusing to meet you be more understandable than when you do? And why would Udina be easier to understand as Councellor than Anderson? Introductions are needed for both either way. Why not the more sympathetic councellor?

[TheRevanchist]

I don't mean to sound rude or anything Mr. Gogeta...but it seems to me that you've so utterly convinced yourself that your own interpretation of these choices is the only possible way it can be that you simply refuse to see it from any other perspective. Like one that don't think Paragon is better for instence...you're playing a Renegade with a Paragon mind-set which is why your upset. I really don't see how one or two extra lines of dialogue....lines that Renegades can get too by the way...really constitue an exageration like "ME3 is 5 min for Renegades and 40 hours for Paragons". Thats just silly...the game is the same length for both playstyles....Only reason my Renegades playthroughs are always shorter is because she sticks to the mission...she dont waste time helping every little world with their problems. My Renegade is indeed a pro-human/ anti-alien Shepard...and considers the new Council better in every way if only because humans now control everything. Her only regret was she couldn't capture the Destiny Ascention for humanity as well.

What were trying to tell you sir...is if you play this game from the persective of Shepard...rather then an omnipotent player the Renegade choices are not nearly as "lacking" as you seem to think. Even from the perspective of a omnipotent player...Paragon is not automaticly the superior choice. A few extra lines of dialogue from NPCs that dont really matter is hardly "preferential treatment". Vauge promises of support from a race we know nothing about is hardly preferential treatment.
Extra people being alive does not equate to preferential treatment, it is nothing more then a preference...if you want more people alive do Paragon...if you want a darker story where theres casulties...you pick Renegade...it's all what you prefer to see sir...neaither is inherintly better then the other...they both work exactly as intended. The only thing here preventing you from enjoying the system is your own interpretations of how you think the system should work and how your interpreting that system. If you wish to be ironwall'd and refuse to even consider thinking from a standpoint where Renegade is more fair then you seem to think...then you only have yourself to blame for you lack of enjoyment, not Bioware or anyone else. It should seem pretty obvious from this thread that not everyone thinks your view is correct, and just becauase they disagree with you does not mean they are wrong, your opinion and interpretation of the situation is not a matter-of-fact standpoint as seen by others in the thread who have tried over and over again to explain this to you...yet you continue to try and push your interpretations as "The way it is without any other possibility". I personally am not judgeing you for this...you have the right to think however you want. However I must admit it's rather irking to see someone try to force their interpretations as facts upon everyone else when others clearly don't see it that way and refuse to acknowlege the validity of their perspectives. Clearly Bioware see's it like we do...and do not in anyway think they are pandering to anyone. They simply create two different playstyles, how you choose to interpret them is up to you.
Lastly...making the default Shepard Paragon would make no sense without something like Genisis. New players would not know about Rachni, for example...this does not = Renegades get the shaft. This simply means new players won't be confused by a pointless cameo of an Asari telling you some race made a vauge promise to help you againt some malevolent beings you know nothing about. Renegades however made a definitive choice regarding Rachni (ignoreing the fact Renegades can still choose the Rachni) there is no possibility of confusetion...Renegades got resolution to the situation, they don't ever have to worry about the possible consequences.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

kylecouch, I am seeing it from your perspective. I'm also seeing it from Moiassi's and Rip504's perspective.

Given your latest response, it sounds like you've blown the whole notion of what I've been saying out of proportion. I'm not saying Renegades suck because of this... because they don't. This is about choices and the content that results from them. You mention extra things that the Paragon choice grants and don't consider that a plus for the Paragon choice... when in basically any other circumstance (like platform exclusive content) it's considered an advantage...

You all just seem to not feel the game can be critiqued regarding this matter... and seem to refuse looking at what's been presented by the game itself (not just my conclusions or your own personal notions) to draw your conclusions. You like certain outcomes that have happened thusfar? So do I... but they shouldn't be isolated exclusively to one color (red or blue) in order to get that kind of outcome.... it removes the notion of making a meaningful choice.  It has nothing to do with a Paragon/Renegade way of thinking.

So lets make this simple and wind this discussion down:

What would you consider to be a beneficial component to a choice? What would have to happen in a situation to have a more "positive" outcome compared to another?

If your arguement is that in-game benefits/positive outcomes to decisions cannot be defined (be they more lives saved, extra content and cameos, positive validation, or whatever) and are relative to the player only... then it makes sense why you have such a hard time with what I'm presenting and the issue people are arguing over. Not much to say to someone that doesn't feel a more positive, content-filled outcome can be quantified.

There is a difference between having less content and personally not minding it. You can enjoy what was on display... but that still doesn't preclude more content (etc. etc.) being available had you made a different choice.  And for the record, the whole "5 min for Renegades and 40 hours for Paragons" was an "extreme" example to illustrate clearly that the issue is less content for one and more for the other (among other things)... and that they are not equal.

Thank you for addressing me as sir and not riding off the handle.  I do appreciate even-tempered conversations.  Should you not mind, I'd appreciate you taking some time to understand the arguement I'm presenting regarding a game about choices and really consider it... weigh it out or atleast answer the questions I asked in this post.


P.S.  I'm glad you addressed the Rachni bit, and you're right regarding the Paragon side... but it does result in some shaft for Renegades because there's other areas and other choices that could've resulted in cameos for the Renegade side that simply was not present.  The issue is still about content from choices.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 26 juin 2011 - 05:25 .