1768 réponses à ce sujet

[Lumikki]

GodWood wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

GodWood wrote...

Lumikki wrote...
Killing other person is ALLWAYS negative, even when it saves 1 000 000 000 000 000 people. It's not the result that defines it, but the action it self.

So with your twisted 'morals' the positive thing to do is let the 1 000 000 000 000 000 people die?

And because you saved those 1 000 000 000 000 000 people by killing one, one of those save persons ended hole life in the hole galaxy. So, in end you killed all life by killing that one person.

That's why actions can be judge only by what is the nature the action it self. Because there is no end in chain of reactions.

And that one person you selfishly let live at the cost of 1 000 000 000 000 000 lives grows up to be a baby eating rapist, who eventually wipes out all life in the galaxy.


See, two can play at that stupid game.

Exactly. You all miss my point.

Action it self can be negative or positive.
Also result of action can be negative or positive.

You can't just judge from result perspective, because sometimes when you do the action, you don't even know what result will be. Meaning killing other person is never positive action, while the result of it can be necassary and very positive. So, when you don't know the result, you only judgement is the action self.

Modifié par Lumikki, 06 juillet 2011 - 11:55 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Massadonious1 wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
 favoritism comes in when the opinion is unanimous

And any sort of "punishment" would just be the reverse. The game tells me I should of done it from the other way from the start, which is stupid.

You want acknowledgement, that's fine. Paragons certainly get plenty of it. But I refuse to accept anything too drastic, nor would I wish the same on you.

I think there should be times where a Renegade decision leads to a more positive result than the Paragon alternative... or atleast some kind of upside to making the choice.  The first 2 games haven't done that at all. 

In addition to that, they should have equal content (if the Paragon choice leads to seeing someone unique to it, the Renegade choice can get the same thing just relevant to the decision made).

[ThePwener]

Here it is in a nutshell.

Your retarded and letting 1 000 000 000 000 000 would make you the biggest war criminal in history... if there are any humans left that is.

Even if it is 2 people vs 1, the right thing will always be the 2. Do you know the future? You'll let more die beacuse they "may" be bad? Your retarded, I can say that much.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

CH = Casey Hudson on Paragon/Renegade choices for Mass Effect 3
GS = Gamespot interviewer

CH:  "It does get into grey areas and more and more we want to try and obfuscate ultimately what is right or wrong because ultimately Paragon and Renegade is not meant to be 'Good' and 'Evil.'  It's a little bit different where it's a question of 'do you sacrifice anything for the greater good' or are you unwilling to make certain sacrifices just to justify the end."

GS:  "and then you have to deal with those consequences"

CH:  "that's right"

9:32


So there may be a reason to role-play for the most positive outcome afterall (particularly the first sentence)....  They sure haven't done that yet, so far the Blue button has always been the most positive and content-filled button.

Then again it still wouldn't surprise me if the Paragon choices end up being the most favored choices of the game once more.

[Lumikki]

ThePwener wrote...

Here it is in a nutshell.

Your retarded and letting 1 000 000 000 000 000 would make you the biggest war criminal in history... if there are any humans left that is.

Even if it is 2 people vs 1, the right thing will always be the 2. Do you know the future? You'll let more die beacuse they "may" be bad? Your retarded, I can say that much.

I wasn't talking about let someone live and then kill 1 000 000 000 000 000. You just deside to take it that way.
I was talking that killing that one person is also negative action. Just because result is positive doesn't change the actions negative nature it self. You seem to looking just result, like end justify everyting. What about when you don't even know the end result, how you justify you actions then?

Maybe my writing was misleading, if so then I'm sorry.

Modifié par Lumikki, 06 juillet 2011 - 12:07 .

[ThePwener]

Yor writing isn't misleading, your just crazy. Choosing one over 1 000 000 000 000 000 even when you DON'T know everything is insane.

[Dean_the_Young]

Reapinger wrote...

Funny thought that... When you're not a total jerk and help people out everything works out a little better? Who knew?

Clearly why the world and wars are dominated by the nice people.

[mauro2222]

I think none of you have understood what Lumikki is trying to say

[robarcool]

Valentia X wrote...

robarcool wrote...

What all the fuss is about? Renegade players can always have new paragon playthroughs and they can experience what paragons can. Yeah, I get it that it the paragon character you want to face some music, but common, it is a game guys.

I think you're missing the point. 

Part of the interest in the MEffect games is the idea that choices matter, and it was inferred that there is no right or wrong. However, in terms of game play, NPC response, and little extras like cameos, paragons come out on top. Renegades, renegons and paragades would like a few of those bones tossed our way, thanks.

It also kills replayability. My original character paragoned her way through ME1 and ME2. Then I did a NG+ and renegoned, and basically the big difference was that some people thought I was an a--hole, and I lost some options without gaining any. I'm now going through ME1 again as a paragade, which will slide into renegon in ME2, and I'm not looking at anything new, only a loss of said game play, NPC response, and little extras like cameos. I'm not asking better. I'm asking for something different. This game should have more variety in terms of repercussions, consequences, and rewards.

Well, renegons always get the short end of the stick because the charm/intimidate dialogues are enabled/disabled based on your past dialogue choices in ME2. If you choose most of the charm options in the past, only then you will be able to use the charm dialogue at a moment. Same for intimidate. But if you go full renegade, you can have all initmidate options open. I also wish that Bioware doesn't handle charm/intimidate this way. It kind of forces the player to choose one route.

[robarcool]

ThePwener wrote...

Paragon=Destroy Collector Base

I think this will be very bad at some point in ME3

It won't. Cerberus is an enemy and giving them the Collector Base makes them more powerful. Maybe, players who didn't blow it up might have to face additional enemies, or some dreadful weapon based on Collectors technology, wielded by Cerberus troops. I would like that.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

My beef with what Bioware has done extends beyond mere Paragon vs Renegade...

A game that's supposed to be about choices has been rigged to favor one option the most (Paragon)... every... single... time.

How are you supposed to really make a 'tough choice' or 'sacrifices' when you're aware of this? What's so 'tough' about always picking the blue button?

[Repearized Miranda]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

My beef with what Bioware has done extends beyond mere Paragon vs Renegade...

A game that's supposed to be about choices has been rigged to favor one option the most (Paragon)... every... single... time.

How are you supposed to really make a 'tough choice' or 'sacrifices' when you're aware of this? What's so 'tough' about always picking the blue button?

[sarcasm]I've always picked the red button which totally negates what I'm told to do apparently. Making those red choices were just as hard. If people would think for at least a split-second, instead of pushing buttons.[/sarcasm]

Neo didn't do this much complaining in regards to Morpheus' simple question, but he did think about the consequences somewhat and dealt with them accordingly. But according to this thread: Morpheus told him to pick said pill and he clearly did NOT!

I wonder what would be said if Neo came back whining to him having picked the wrong pill? "Your choice. Your consequence."

Heck, Saw (franchise) is a much better example. He never tells you what to do - he just tells you the consequence and to "Make your choice!" (or other suitable variants) Notice how whatever choice is made, there is a consequence - both good and bad. Save another or save yourself? Save another, means sacrificing yourself. To save yourself, means to sacrifice others. (First option: you live, they die. Second option: you die, they live) Two choices, four possible consequences.

[mulder1199]

there def needs to be a way for paras to win as well as lose and the same for renegades....

this is where your actions should really have consequences....

[Dean_the_Young]

Lumikki wrote...

GodWood wrote...

Lumikki wrote...
Killing other person is ALLWAYS negative, even when it saves 1 000 000 000 000 000 people. It's not the result that defines it, but the action it self.

So with your twisted 'morals' the positive thing to do is let the 1 000 000 000 000 000 people die?

And because you saved those 1 000 000 000 000 000 people by killing one, one of those save persons ended hole life in the hole galaxy. So, in end you killed all life by killing that one person.

That's why actions can be judge only by what is the nature the action it self. Because there is no end in chain of reactions.

What.

The.

****.

[Dean_the_Young]

mauro2222 wrote...

I think none of you have understood what Lumikki is trying to say

No, I think we do understand, and the problem is that Lumikki is a morally abhorrent person who hides behind invented hypotheticals entirely unrelated to an arbitrary standard that is entirely irrelevant and unconnected to his hypotheticals.

It should be rather telling that the justification for Lumikki's basis for allowing 1,000,000,000 people die rather than kill one person (that one of those people will turn out to end all life) can, without any change in logic, be used to demand the murder of 1,000,000,000 people on account that every single one of them will end all life otherwise.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 06 juillet 2011 - 07:59 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Repearized Miranda wrote...

Heck, Saw (franchise) is a much better example.

Yeah, see, here's about where your argument really jumps off traintracks. When you need to compare a insane madman's murder-torture delimmas to a fair choice, this is about the point where intuition really should be knocking on the door. 'Mutiliate yourself or people near you/including you will die' should never be confused with the 'balanced choices' that Mass Effect argues is the basis of its system.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 06 juillet 2011 - 07:54 .

[Arppis]

Valentia X wrote...

Saaziel wrote...

Renegon & Paragade.

Because having choices means that you don't naively or fanatically limit yourself.

Hear hear. Even compassionate people can be practical even if it hurts their heart, and even unstoppable badasses can have lines they won't cross.

You nailed it! *thumbs up*

:happy:

Plus, if someone really thinks being douchebag at everyone is alright if you just save the galaxy, seek help (mental kind)! But if you take it from entertaiment value, that is fine. After all it is only a game! 

Modifié par Arppis, 06 juillet 2011 - 07:57 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Lumikki wrote...

GodWood wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

GodWood wrote...

Lumikki wrote...
Killing other person is ALLWAYS negative, even when it saves 1 000 000 000 000 000 people. It's not the result that defines it, but the action it self.

So with your twisted 'morals' the positive thing to do is let the 1 000 000 000 000 000 people die?

And because you saved those 1 000 000 000 000 000 people by killing one, one of those save persons ended hole life in the hole galaxy. So, in end you killed all life by killing that one person.

That's why actions can be judge only by what is the nature the action it self. Because there is no end in chain of reactions.

And that one person you selfishly let live at the cost of 1 000 000 000 000 000 lives grows up to be a baby eating rapist, who eventually wipes out all life in the galaxy.


See, two can play at that stupid game.

Exactly. You all miss my point.

Action it self can be negative or positive.
Also result of action can be negative or positive.

You can't just judge from result perspective, because sometimes when you do the action, you don't even know what result will be. Meaning killing other person is never positive action, while the result of it can be necassary and very positive. So, when you don't know the result, you only judgement is the action self.

It seems you've invented a new definition of positive and negative actions completely unique to yourself. Do define.

[Repearized Miranda]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Repearized Miranda wrote...

Heck, Saw (franchise) is a much better example.

Yeah, see, here's about where your argument really jumps off traintracks. When you need to compare a insane madman's murder-torture delimmas to a fair choice, this is about the point where intuition really should be knocking on the door. 'Mutiliate yourself of people near you/including you will die' should never be confused with the 'balanced choices' that Mass Effect argues is the basis of its system.

Obviously, not physically.

Shepard saving a few squadmates, therefore, sacrificing millions (ie: Tali/Garrus/Legion for respective races)

OR

Saving the entire races at the expense of respective squadmates.

How is the Saw comparison different despite being much more gratuitous and there being alot less people involved? If  TIM gets as mad as Kramer, I still wouldn't see a difference. That isn't the point. People don't realize that there are two ways to look at the choices.

Paragon: "This seems like a good thing, but it may not be"
Renegade: "This seems like a bad thing, but it may not be

Who says the inverse of each statement can't be true, too? Whereas, the good thing (in appearance) is bad and the bad thing (in appearance) is good. What looks good to you may be good FOR you, so to speak.

Again, I did go a little too far with the Saw comparision, but as I said, I don't tink BW miffed on the "everything has a positive and a negative" mantra either.

It would equally ****** off people if they blantantly scripted-the-flip in that regard. Paragons are ruthless while Renegades are noble.

Modifié par Repearized Miranda, 06 juillet 2011 - 08:14 .

[pablodurando]

Paragon, Renegade, they're both going to lead to some sort of victory for Shepard, and they're both going to require sacrifice. To say that only Paragons need to be punished is very naive and monocentric(using a connotation here).

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Repearized Miranda wrote...
[sarcasm]I've always picked the red button which totally negates what I'm told to do apparently. Making those red choices were just as hard. If people would think for at least a split-second, instead of pushing buttons.[/sarcasm]

Neo didn't do this much complaining in regards to Morpheus' simple question, but he did think about the consequences somewhat and dealt with them accordingly. But according to this thread: Morpheus told him to pick said pill and he clearly did NOT!

I wonder what would be said if Neo came back whining to him having picked the wrong pill? "Your choice. Your consequence."

Heck, Saw (franchise) is a much better example. He never tells you what to do - he just tells you the consequence and to "Make your choice!" (or other suitable variants) Notice how whatever choice is made, there is a consequence - both good and bad. Save another or save yourself? Save another, means sacrificing yourself. To save yourself, means to sacrifice others. (First option: you live, they die. Second option: you die, they live) Two choices, four possible consequences.

You've missed the point... no one is against consequences... just favoritism to an exclusive choice. 

If you want the most positive result (most lives saved, most positive validation, most content with absolutely no drawbacks compared to the alternative choices), what good are the other choices if you know the blue one grants that result regardless of what the situation may be... regardless of any circumstances... and regadless of what's at stake?

Also realize that this complaint is happening after 2 of the planned 3 games...  Now or never if an influence is possible.

Simply put... the game should not wrap outcomes around Paragon choices exclusively... that's a punishment to making any other choice and removes the weight of the choice to a considerable degree.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 06 juillet 2011 - 08:53 .

[mauro2222]

Well as long as you keep your humanity while you save those people, good. If you risk that humanity, well, a lot of those who you have saved will always see you as an example, if you go for the objective blowing up everything and everyone, they would do the same. There is always another path and resolutions to problems that don´t require any life sacrifice but more determination and will to solve it.
If those people lack the only thing that makes us good people, they are nothing more than husks.

[Lumikki]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

It seems you've invented a new definition of positive and negative actions completely unique to yourself. Do define

I don't think so. I don't want to waste my time. I readed you previous posts.

Positive of negative action?

Case 1
You are police man and you see man in street and he fits description of known terrorist you where looking.
You shout for the man to stop and pull you gun, but he start running and you shoot the man to the dead?

Case 2
You go to friends birthday party and give you friend a gift (packet).

Modifié par Lumikki, 06 juillet 2011 - 10:45 .

[marshalleck]

Lumikki wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

It seems you've invented a new definition of positive and negative actions completely unique to yourself. Do define

I don't think so. I don't want to waste my time. I readed you previous posts.

Positive of negative action?

Case 1
You are police man and you see man in street and he fits description of known terrorist you where looking.
You shout for the man to stop and pull you gun, but he start running and you shoot the man to the dead?

Case 2
You go to friends birthday party and give you friend a gift (packet).

what is this I don't even

[mauro2222]

Hehe Lumikki can you explain? xD