37 réponses à ce sujet

[Lumikki]

caraniente wrote...

Reputation causing behaviour change is possible if the people involved have characters that will respond to that behaviour, or you've treated them a certain way in the past.

And no, in the end it doesn't matter. I didn't start the thread to complain. I started it to simply point out something that, to me (and clearly a lot of other people now you guys have kindly directed me to the ME2 forum discussions) didn't make sense and could be improved upon in ME3.

Sorry, I don't mean anything. I wasn't targeting you at all in my posts, just generally to everyone.

Try search word "paragon" on  forums search in ME's general disccussion.  I think that would find them..

Modifié par Lumikki, 23 juin 2011 - 02:57 .

[MarchWaltz]

I have a shep that I play like a solider; in ME1, she was making decisions that best suited the alliance, but did help civilians; like a soldier does.

Little harder in ME2, but still did the same, no fannying about type of demeanor.

In both games, I literally had almost the same para/rene bar, Ill post a pic later on.

[Smeelia]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Now I'm not against that. Actually, I would be 100% for that. I'm always for more choice in roleplaying games, as long as the choice is meaningful.

Well, indeed.  ME1 persuasion wasn't perfect but it still added a fun option for characters (without being a so called "I-win" button) and it didn't make anything worse whether you used it or not (you could even save Wrex without it).

The problem is that they dropped persuasion in ME2 and thus reduced the options (while leaving something that looked like persuasion but was really just an extra option that suddenly disappeared if you play a particular way).

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

I'm simply arguing that its possible to roleplay the game and accomplish everything without worrying about metagaming. Sure, there is a greater chance of some negative consequences.

For some people, part of the problem is the implication that they've been "playing the game wrong" when the options suddenly vanish due to their roleplaying(which I expect is unintentional).

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

I've had roleplay runthroughs. They work quite well, I don't miss out on anything and it was fun to play. Again, I still don't really like the system. Having the magic text out there makes people feel like they have to pursue it or they miss out on something, which is simply not the case.

Basically, I think it would be better if they removed the persuasion altogether or made something that really was about player choice (which at least the ME1 system mostly had).  Since persuasion existed in ME1, it's not really unreasonable to expect it in ME2.

Modifié par Smeelia, 23 juin 2011 - 03:16 .

[Casper DM]

I think that neutral characters are a very weak aspect in most RPG games and Mass Effect is no exception. I also think that persuasion should be a gauge of skill not based on the morality of the choices you have made previously.

You could say that if you are role playing you shouldn't care that there is an optimal solution, my problem is that there is an optimal solution, that there is no magic neutral dialogue option or interrupt feature and that if I want a magic option I have to play the game a certain way to get it. The fact that I have a lack of choice because I didn't play the game a certain way is with-holding content.

[xentar]

So, just what exactly is bad in wanting to get optimal result in a game?

[xentar]

Lumikki wrote...

caraniente wrote...

I'm not complaining the system doesn't allow you to roleplay. I'm stating that using paragon/renegade for persuade checks does not make sense.

In ME2, there is no persuation. Problem is that you think hole consept like some persuation point, when there isn't one.
It's more like reputation causing behavior changes. If you meet USA president face to face, does it change you behavior without saying single word.

Not to restart that old and tired argument, but, you know, that's just semantics. One can in this case easily say that ME2 has a flawed reputation system that doesn't make sense and thus needs to be removed.

Modifié par xentar, 23 juin 2011 - 04:13 .

[Lumikki]

xentar wrote...

Not to restart that old and tired argument, byt, you know, that's just semantics.

Not really, they are two different thing. Not as what they do as end result, but as how they do it.

One can in this case easily say that ME2 has a flawed reputation system that doesn't make sense and thus needs to be removed.

You can as opinion think what ever you like about the system.

[Guitar-Hero]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Steffen wrote...

I don't think that it's about wanting the optimal result, it's the fact that the game forces you to play a certain way if you want a full experience, that breaks emmersion and punishes the player by dangeling a carrot in front of you, it would be like sayin" You can save both Ash. and Kaiden.. Oh you don't have the magical shoebox? what a shame,  you should have played the game the way we wanted you to play."  

A "full experience"? The red/blue text give you a different experience but not a more full experience. As mentioned in my earlier post, you miss out on some cool moments if you simply indoctrinate your way out of it.

There are consequences for opting to play as Renegon or Paragade that exclude content, such as the Morinth/Semara incident, loyalty being taken away and so forth, i agree that every choice should have concequences, but the concequence should represent itself on equal merit rather than punishing players who want to enjoy a game that is far more interesting playing on the grayscale.

[Cutlass Jack]

I was largely paragade on my main playthrough and Had no trouble with checks. But you have to max out the skill that gives you bonuses to your paragon/renegade score. That's a given.

[Casper DM]

xentar wrote...

So, just what exactly is bad in wanting to get optimal result in a game?

I personally don't think optimal result and RPG go together because it means playing the game a certain way the "right way" and that doing this instead of that provides a better rather than a different result defeating the purpose of giving people a choice.

[Smeelia]

Cutlass Jack wrote...

I was largely paragade on my main playthrough and Had no trouble with checks. But you have to max out the skill that gives you bonuses to your paragon/renegade score. That's a given.

It might have been simpler if they'd made the bonus to Paragon/Renegade in your class skill actually be a Persuasion rating.  That way, players could choose between the more combat focussed evolution and a persuasion based one.  It wouldn't be perfect but at least it'd be your choice if you want 70% persuasion skill or 100% persuasion skill rather than having it be a weird modifier for a badly made system.

[Skirata129]

I was only unable to solve that fight my first playthrough, since then I'm usually about 100% renegade, 30% paragon every time. I usually side with Miranda and then tell Jack I like her angry later. focused rage makes people fight harder.

[The Baconer]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...
And a few places where you get rewarded for roleplaying. Don't have the points for the magic red text in questioning the crook on the Citadel so you can't intimidate him? Then you get to beat on him. If that's not a renegade RP reward then I don't know what is.

Morinth.

If you really want to roleplay then the magic Shepard indoctrination
text is an ugly intrusion. In real life, you simply can't talk people
into anything.

I never said I wanet to magically indoctrinate people. In ME1 if I chose to put my points into Intimidate, I'd only be able to use Intimidate as my method of persuasion. However, I still wouldn't be forced to play as a total heel for the whole game.