Lumikki wrote...
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.
You know, I sorta agree with this. On the face of it, they shouldn't be
equal to the point where their is effectively no decision. If a Renegade and Paragon decision both nets a result of 500 credits, then there probably isn't much point in having the Renegade/Paragon path in the first place.
This isn't what we're saying though.
We're saying that for content action A, which gets you Z as a paragon, then as a Renegade you should perform content action B, which gets you Y. In both examples there should be some reward that may be considered 'equal' and yet they are fundamentally different.
Zorya sorta handled this in a way by sacrificing the workers gives you an extra upgrade slot for your AR's (while saving the workers nets you another Heavy Weapon upgrade). However, Zorya falls down imo in other methods that seem backwards as to the real reason why you're there in the first place.
Lumikki wrote...
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.
With respect, I think your last statement is a crock. There is no universal 'good' or 'bad' making your argument on morality to be completely pointless. May I remind you that in certain parts of the world; death by stoning is perfectly acceptable. Whether you agree with it or not is actually on the face of it; pretty meaningless as to whether it's a universal 'good' or 'bad.'
Lumikki wrote...
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.
Then what's the friggin' point of having choices in regards to a renegade or paragon path? If a paragon path always results in a
net good, and a renegade path always results in a
net bad, then the decision becomes completely moronic.
Why would
anyone eventually take a Renegade pathway if it always meant:
• They would 'lose' in some tangible way
• They are universally reviled.
Renegade decisions are
supposed to be weighing up things using dispassionate 'logic.' To (over)simplify; a Renegade see's a house on fire; he weighs the fact that in the time it'll take to fetch water to put it out, the fire might spread to two other houses amongst a community and kill all the occupants (with the fire getting more and more out of control). The flipside being though by not fetching water the houses will go up but he will at least rescue at least some occupants.
He therefore has a choice; fetch water and save the community at the cost of some occupants of the burning buildings;
Or
Go immediately into the buildings, save the occupants but at the expense of the community.
The problem I see it is that atm the Paragon choices seem to get their cake and eat it too; in my example above, they not only save all the occupants, but save the community as well, and the fire was contained.
Modifié par Arijharn, 08 juillet 2011 - 12:29 .
Retour en haut
