1768 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Repearized Miranda wrote...
So, I take it Renegade = "most negative choice" while neutral is ...

I want an apple
I don't care for neither
I want an orange

How is choosing the apple most positive than choosing the orange, besides, I like apples better with the inverse also being true?

The neutral answer could mean: "I do like both, but I don't care for either at this particular time." This says that you could pick up either (or perhaps both) later.

As for the roleplaying, why don't people who wanna do that just flip-flop between such choices since "neutral = nothing" apparently. I wouldn't disagree as many don't pick such options. That would be very fustrating, but you'd get what you want apparently.

Renegade generally = the "most gimped choice" while neutral is the Renegade choice.

Whether you Concentrate on Sovereign or Let the Council Die, you're met with the same scenario in Mass Effect 2.  Nothing changes.  And the neutral choice is "I don't want the Council to die, but the galaxy (and the lives of everyone in it... including the Council) comes first."

It's not really an apple/orange choice.  You either feel the Council has time to be saved (or that all life in the galaxy is not worth anything if those specific Council members fall)... or You feel that the Council will have to wait because the galaxy's at stake (or that they aren't worth saving in the face of galactic extinction).

It turns out that there's plenty of time to save the Council... and focusing on Sovereign doesn't save any more lives or better your chances at defeating Sovereign.  The Paragon choice not only saves the Council, but loses less lives than the Renegade alternative to remove the threat of Sovereign.

And the point is wanting choices with weight.  No choice should equal "nothing."  That's the problem.

[GodWood]

KevShep wrote...

I will sum it all up. The ends never justify the means.......ever!.....They never have! Sometimes the ends justify the means is a whole lot of fun and...THAT... is the payoff for renegades, so if you dont want to sacrifice anything in order to have fun then dont play as a renegade.

This should not even be paragon vs renegade....all decisions in Mass Effect should be disguised more and not divided into right and wrong or good and evil. it should be about what is logical/ethical. So stop with the whole rewarding renegades and punishing paragons. Who ever said being bad was good anyway?

It is

Modifié par GodWood, 08 juillet 2011 - 09:20 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

How so? One wouls never get through an initial playthrough if one thought: "Oh, I hope I'm not playing wrong!" You shouldn't even be thinking that. I've done some things I'll probably regret, but I wanna get to the end of the game - if that means not winning it (full paragon), fine. Again, I guess Renegades are losers, but I haven't seen a "Can Renegade =/= Defeat?" thread yet. [sarcasm]Perhaps I should make one?[/sarcasm]

I'm not thinking that way and never said I was thinking that way. The point is still not "knowing" ahead of time that the most positive outcome will result from the blue button... because it removes the weight of making a choice. No choice is "difficult" in the wake of that.  Replaying the game doesn't change that either.

If you didn't know what would lead to the most positive outcome, you'd have a better game. When it's rigged, the game loses steam.

Most don't seem to be aware of it... but it's similar to a spoiler for those that are.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 08 juillet 2011 - 09:40 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

KevShep wrote...

I will sum it all up. The ends never justify the means.......ever!.....They never have! Sometimes the ends justify the means is a whole lot of fun and...THAT... is the payoff for renegades, so if you dont want to sacrifice anything in order to have fun then dont play as a renegade. And if you want to have fun as a renegade then dont complain when you have to sacrifice something to save the galaxy.

The ends never justify the means?  Then why did Shepard kill all of those Batarians in the Arrival DLC?  The ends do justify the means... it just depends on whether Bioware writes them there or not.

The Renegade choices aren't about "fun"... the Interrupts are though, lol. 

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 08 juillet 2011 - 09:44 .

[Arijharn]

It's pretty simplistic to say 'the ends never justify the means' imo. Maybe in fairytale's that's a good lesson, but I don't think real life is that 'simple,' even if it is a nice thing to aspire too. If ME wants to be treated as some sort of adult tale of morality at least, then I think it behooves them to make writing decisions that sort of gives some sort of measured pay-off between the too philosophies.

Maybe paragons might give you the reward of more support;
Maybe Renegades might give you the reward of high technology;

Maybe a mix of the philosophies might net you a blend of those two rewards, but it might be skewed to one result over another.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

In eastern philosophy, they say that "the good gin is neither hard nor soft." There's times to be passive and times to be aggressive. There's times to take risks and times to be safe, etc.

If Mass Effect followed this philosophy I think they'd have a considerably better series.

And replay-wise, if Bioware allowed for equivalent content for choices other than the Paragon one, they'd have a considerably better game.  (Which is not to say the game sucks, because it's still awesome... but a problem is a problem, no matter where you find it)

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 08 juillet 2011 - 09:51 .

[Repearized Miranda]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

How so? One wouls never get through an initial playthrough if one thought: "Oh, I hope I'm not playing wrong!" You shouldn't even be thinking that. I've done some things I'll probably regret, but I wanna get to the end of the game - if that means not winning it (full paragon), fine. Again, I guess Renegades are losers, but I haven't seen a "Can Renegade =/= Defeat?" thread yet. [sarcasm]Perhaps I should make one?[/sarcasm]

I'm not thinking that way and never said I was thinking that way. The point is still not "knowing" ahead of time that the most positive outcome will result from the blue button... because it removes the weight of making a choice. No choice is "difficult" in the wake of that.  Replaying the game doesn't change that either.

If you didn't know what would lead to the most positive outcome, you'd have a better game. When it's rigged, the game loses steam.

Most don't seem to be aware of it... but it's similar to a spoiler for those that are.

Again, we don't know if the blue answer grants the most positive outcome --- we are assuming that. Saving the Rachni queen? Gee, it was blue, so I won't get punished for that. The Collector Base - it was good to blow that up, but something worse could happen despite cerberus on my ass - or me being on theirs. We don't know. While it is true that we'll have hunches based on what was previously seen, heard or done, we still don't know.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Repearized Miranda wrote...
Again, we don't know if the blue answer grants the most positive outcome --- we are assuming that.

We know they do for the first 2 games. 

Saving the Rachni queen? Gee, it was blue, so I won't get punished for that. The Collector Base - it was good to blow that up, but something worse could happen despite cerberus on my ass - or me being on theirs. We don't know. While it is true that we'll have hunches based on what was previously seen, heard or done, we still don't know.
.

That's why this is being brought up now to try and prevent it from permeating the last game of the trilogy.  Admittedly, the game may be too far gone at this point.

But Casey's quote on making unclear what's right or wrong is a hopeful sign.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 08 juillet 2011 - 10:01 .

[Repearized Miranda]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Renegade generally = the "most gimped choice" while neutral is the Renegade choice.

Whether you Concentrate on Sovereign or Let the Council Die, you're met with the same scenario in Mass Effect 2.  Nothing changes.  And the neutral choice is "I don't want the Council to die, but the galaxy (and the lives of everyone in it... including the Council) comes first."

It's not really an apple/orange choice.  You either feel the Council has time to be saved (or that all life in the galaxy is not worth anything if those specific Council members fall)... or You feel that the Council will have to wait because the galaxy's at stake (or that they aren't worth saving in the face of galactic extinction).

It turns out that there's plenty of time to save the Council... and focusing on Sovereign doesn't save any more lives or better your chances at defeating Sovereign.  The Paragon choice not only saves the Council, but loses less lives than the Renegade alternative to remove the threat of Sovereign.

And the point is wanting choices with weight.  No choice should equal "nothing."  That's the problem.

Nor do they! But according to this thread and its logic - Paragon means you win - Renegade means you lose - Neutral means - I'm still playing

At some point, the game has got to end with you either having won or lost. There's no way to get around it unless you just quit playing.

Every choice in the games has carried weight.

[Arppis]

Renegade means you win too. You just win in diffirent manner, you know looking out for Number One.

Paragon victory feels better for me, because I enjoy helping others out and actualy building something, instead of destroying things that might benefit the whole galaxy.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Repearized Miranda wrote...

Nor do they! But according to this thread and its logic - Paragon means you win - Renegade means you lose - Neutral means - I'm still playing

At some point, the game has got to end with you either having won or lost. There's no way to get around it unless you just quit playing.

Every choice in the games has carried weight.

The OP worded things funny, but that's not what he meant (as evidenced by the content of his first post).

And there's nothing wrong with right/wrong choices... but Paragon is not supposed to be the exclusively "right" choice (Casey Hudson also said this).

The problem though is that thusfar, in the wake of the choices... that's how it's been.  If it continues, then making a chioce will resort to seeing the most positive outcome vs something worse... knowing exactly which is which.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Arppis wrote...

Renegade means you win too. You just win in diffirent manner, you know looking out for Number One.

Paragon victory feels better for me, because I enjoy helping others out and actualy building something, instead of destroying things that might benefit the whole galaxy.

Renegade choices prove that they look out for more than themselves.  Additionally, the Collector Base may benefit 'the whole galaxy'... and Paragons destroyed it.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 08 juillet 2011 - 10:13 .

[Repearized Miranda]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Repearized Miranda wrote...
Again, we don't know if the blue answer grants the most positive outcome --- we are assuming that.

We know they do for the first 2 games. 

Saving the Rachni queen? Gee, it was blue, so I won't get punished for that. The Collector Base - it was good to blow that up, but something worse could happen despite cerberus on my ass - or me being on theirs. We don't know. While it is true that we'll have hunches based on what was previously seen, heard or done, we still don't know.
.

That's why this is being brought up now to try and prevent it from permeating the last game of the trilogy.  Admittedly, the game may be too far gone at this point.

But Casey's quote on making unclear what's right or wrong is a hopeful sign.

But did he say that the choices were clear as day in the first two games? I mean, I'm glad he said this, too; however, I'm surprised that they "supposedly" didn't do this since the beginning because whatever we did in ME1, we had no clue what would happen in ME2 as from there to ME3. I'm sure he didn't mean it as: "All choices be yellow," but the color is just a visual - that shouldn't be a bother, but if it makes the game that more ambiguous for you ...

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Also, the whole point of sacrificing for the greater good is where you want to do one thing, but don't for the ultimately better outcome. The Paragon choice does not experience this, and the Renegade choice experience no payoff or positive validation for doing it (compared to the alternative).

[GodWood]

Arppis wrote...
Renegade means you win too. You just win in diffirent manner, you know looking out for Number One.

None of the major renegade decisions have been about looking out for oneself.

The major renegade decisions are about being more pragmatic in contrast to the paragon decisions being more idealistic.

[Repearized Miranda]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Repearized Miranda wrote...

Nor do they! But according to this thread and its logic - Paragon means you win - Renegade means you lose - Neutral means - I'm still playing

At some point, the game has got to end with you either having won or lost. There's no way to get around it unless you just quit playing.

Every choice in the games has carried weight.

The OP worded things funny, but that's not what he meant (as evidenced by the content of his first post).

And there's nothing wrong with right/wrong choices... but Paragon is not supposed to be the exclusively "right" choice (Casey Hudson also said this).

The problem though is that thusfar, in the wake of the choices... that's how it's been.  If it continues, then making a chioce will resort to seeing the most positive outcome vs something worse... knowing exactly which is which.

Then, they may need to fix that for other games as well because they could be interpreted the same way. (No slighting BW, just makng a point)

I wouldn't be surprised if that is exactly how it's still determined though. (Again, not a slight) Just an easy perception to make.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Repearized Miranda wrote...
But did he say that the choices were clear as day in the first two games? I mean, I'm glad he said this, too; however, I'm surprised that they "supposedly" didn't do this since the beginning because whatever we did in ME1, we had no clue what would happen in ME2 as from there to ME3. I'm sure he didn't mean it as: "All choices be yellow," but the color is just a visual - that shouldn't be a bother, but if it makes the game that more ambiguous for you ...

Whether he did or not, what's there is what's there.  The specific color doesn't matter, it's the fact that it comes from one source and Bioware's wraps the story around it (regardless of what the circumstance, stakes, or option is).

And like I said, most don't notice it... but it's like a spoiler for those that do.

[Repearized Miranda]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Arppis wrote...

Renegade means you win too. You just win in diffirent manner, you know looking out for Number One.

Paragon victory feels better for me, because I enjoy helping others out and actualy building something, instead of destroying things that might benefit the whole galaxy.

Renegade choices prove that they look out for more than themselves.  Additionally, the Collector Base may benefit 'the whole galaxy'... and Paragons destroyed it.

The key word is may because keeping it could screw up the galaxy as well. Two possible outcomes, Blue isn't always the applicable choice - favorable, yes - but we won't know until we see the consequence.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Repearized Miranda wrote...
Then, they may need to fix that for other games as well because they could be interpreted the same way. (No slighting BW, just makng a point)

I wouldn't be surprised if that is exactly how it's still determined though. (Again, not a slight) Just an easy perception to make.

Then perhaps future games will allow for the real "tough choices" without having a go-to button to rely on for the most positive outcome.

It even deflates the notion of comparing choices made because of knowing how Bioware writes. 

"I got to this part of the game and had to choose between the most positive outcome or something worse (which additionally may lead to less content, less cameos, and less positive validation)"

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Repearized Miranda wrote...
The key word is may because keeping it could screw up the galaxy as well. Two possible outcomes, Blue isn't always the applicable choice - favorable, yes - but we won't know until we see the consequence.

Technically, Arppis wrote "might."

If Bioware continues with the philosophy of the first 2 games, the Paragon outcome will be fine.  The base won't give any edge and they'll save more lives on top of it.

[Repearized Miranda]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Repearized Miranda wrote...
But did he say that the choices were clear as day in the first two games? I mean, I'm glad he said this, too; however, I'm surprised that they "supposedly" didn't do this since the beginning because whatever we did in ME1, we had no clue what would happen in ME2 as from there to ME3. I'm sure he didn't mean it as: "All choices be yellow," but the color is just a visual - that shouldn't be a bother, but if it makes the game that more ambiguous for you ...

Whether he did or not, what's there is what's there.  The specific color doesn't matter, it's the fact that it comes from one source and Bioware's wraps the story around it (regardless of what the circumstance, stakes, or option is).

And like I said, most don't notice it... but it's like a spoiler for those that do.

Well, aren't most games - like that? They're pretty straight-forward - no matter how much ambiguity is thrown into it. They want the game to go a specific way, but they're telling us that there are different ways to get there.

How do I get from my house to yours? You'd tell me "the best" way to go regardless of how many different ways you know I could get there, no? However, I don't have to take your advice - it'd be wise if I did though.

Paragon is the "best" way to go, but has everybody taken that path? I doubt it. They (renegades) still got to the same place Paragons did.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Repearized Miranda wrote...

Well, aren't most games - like that? They're pretty straight-forward - no matter how much ambiguity is thrown into it. They want the game to go a specific way, but they're telling us that there are different ways to get there.

How do I get from my house to yours? You'd tell me "the best" way to go regardless of how many different ways you know I could get there, no? However, I don't have to take your advice - it'd be wise if I did though.

Paragon is the "best" way to go, but has everybody taken that path? I doubt it. They (renegades) still got to the same place Paragons did.

Actually I think other games handle this a bit better in some regards.  Games like Oblivion and Fable... even Red Dead Redemption, you get equivalent content.  You get exclusive "extra" things for making either decision.  If you were "evil" you'd attract more "evil" people and things.  That kind of thing doesn't happen in Mass Effect.  Characters also usually don't change their mind almost immediately after you make a choice.

Some of the Paragon favoritism in Mass Effect goes as far as to break story continuity.  If you did the Paragon playthrough, things make more sense... but even for them (with the Collector Base decision specifically)... the flip flop is quite massive and unrealistic.

All in all, it's just a big problem... and one I'd like to see fixed.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 08 juillet 2011 - 10:47 .

[Ieldra]

Apparently arguments must be repeated or people will conveniently forget they exist. So here we go again:

(1) Paragons appear to get the better victories
Paragon favoritism is not a matter of win vs. no-win. Everyone knows Renegades can also "win". Or rather we don't really know yet, but we suspect with some justification that they will be able to win. The problem is rather that Paragons are likely to get the "better victory" on several counts - less loss of lives, less unpleasant side effects, more people who like you etc. etc. 

(2) The outcomes of Paragon and Renegade decisions are globally unbalanced, content-wise and story-wise.
So far, it is a plain fact, obvious for everyone to see, that with one inconsequential exception, there are no Renegade options that have resulted in a better outcome than their corresponding Paragon options, while there have been plenty of Paragon options with better outcomes. Either in content, or in storyline consequences. Most of time, in both.

(3) These two points invalidate Renegade options on three counts:
(3a) It's totally unlike how things work in any reasonably realistic world. "Being nice always results in the best" is a concept out of bowdlerized fairytales. For those players who follow the real-world evidence and do not subscribe to the just world fallacy, this makes the *complete* story unbelievable from the start to the end.
(3b) The Renegade school of thought is supposed to be "results at all costs" - i.e. being Renegade is about getting better results than Paragons can get because they're limited by their principles. If Renegade decisions don't get these better results at least some of the time, the whole school of thought is invalidated in-world. If being nice actually did always result in the best, Renegade decisions would never be made by anyone in this universe but by sociopathic jerks.
(3c) For a more game-ish look at things: if decisions with possible consequences in the games are to be seen as justified, they must be validated within the games. So far, in the overwhelming majority of decisions, only Paragon options are validated. By emails, by additional meetings with NPCs etc.. This in spite of the fact that Renegade options need such validation more than Paragon options, because for the Renegade options, the bad side effects are always obvious. So Renegades lose on two counts: not only are positive consequences of their decisions never shown, while the negative ones are always obvious, but since for Paragons the positive is always obvious, they get an additional validation by the fact that any negative side effects of their decisions are never shown. Dealing with Balak in ME1 is the prime example: Paragons never hear of any further acts of terrorism by Balak after they let him go, AND they get a mail from Kate Bowman. Paragons are validated on two counts. Renegades not only get no e-mail telling them, for instance, of the discovery of Balak's future plans they have prevented by killing him, no, in addition they are also reminded that Kate Bowman has died. Renegades fail to be validated on two counts.

I find the apparent consequences of the Collector base decision most annoying of all: It appears to me that Bioware went out of their way to compromise Cerberus' "advancement and protection of humanity" ideology for no better reason than to give overwhelming validation to the decision to destroy the base. 

[Lumikki]

Not much more to say, than renegade and paragon aren't equal and they should not even be, because they are totally different kind of behavior paths.

As for morality, it person has low morality, then they don't anymore like consequences of morality. Only people who still have high morality likes morality choises. Some bad guys thinks they are good guy, even when they aren't.

Example, renegade player doesn't get consequences from bad acts. Then someone could say they should. Problem is they can't because that would make they gameplay to annoying as hell. So, games ignore the negative consequences. Of course renegade path would not get much anything else than negative consequences, because that's the renegade style. Compared paragon what gets positive consequences, because that's what they do in they path style. You can give player positive consequences as much you like, but you can't give them many negative consequences, because players can't handle them. It would make game less fun.

In real life renegade choises often leads in prison.

Modifié par Lumikki, 08 juillet 2011 - 11:11 .