1768 réponses à ce sujet

[Repearized Miranda]

Valentia X wrote...

Repearized Miranda wrote...

^ That, too, but no kool-"ade" drinking for me. Where's that Krogan liquor?

Right next to the fine hanar wine, I suspect. Drink up, me hearties?

"Hit me again! Do it! Put some more of that stuff you put stuff in!" 

*Drinks, passes out, finds self puking in the wrong bathroom (again)*  

[Myzzrimm]

I support this 100%. Also, I'd wish charm to be a skill independant of morality- I play fitting the situation, not just all renegade or all paragon. Different situations call for different solutions, after all., but if you're more neutral, you're basically punished for it.

*sigh*. Fair point, op.

[Raiil]

Reapinger wrote...

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

I think in terms of what people are saying, paragons basically never have anything come back to bite them in the ass, with the fairly minor exception of Elnora. Additionally, not all renegade options are jerkish, and some make a lot of sense. And sometimes it's a jerkass with a heart of gold scenario.

Or, essentially, sometimes taking the not nice road should reap better dividends, instead of being reduced to a holy paladin. Sometimes hard decisions have to be made and bad things happen to good people- not because we want it, but because the greater good demands it. What if it comes down to letting a planet full of colonists getting nuked in order to save half an army that will go on to trample the Big Bad? 

[Raiil]

Myzzrimm wrote...

I support this 100%. Also, I'd wish charm to be a skill independant of morality- I play fitting the situation, not just all renegade or all paragon. Different situations call for different solutions, after all., but if you're more neutral, you're basically punished for it.

*sigh*. Fair point, op.

Yeah, that's how I feel about it. I'm a renagon with a pro-galactic agenda who just isn't all that friendly.

It annoys me because (and this is just my opinion) being unpredictable should net you some interesting results. Sometimes you have to use the stick, and sometimes you have to use the carrot, and I hate how the game seems to railroad you into preferring one or the other. Not everyone wants to be a saint or hardass.

[Myzzrimm]

Valentia X wrote...

Myzzrimm wrote...

I support this 100%. Also, I'd wish charm to be a skill independant of morality- I play fitting the situation, not just all renegade or all paragon. Different situations call for different solutions, after all., but if you're more neutral, you're basically punished for it.

*sigh*. Fair point, op.

Yeah, that's how I feel about it. I'm a renagon with a pro-galactic agenda who just isn't all that friendly.

It annoys me because (and this is just my opinion) being unpredictable should net you some interesting results. Sometimes you have to use the stick, and sometimes you have to use the carrot, and I hate how the game seems to railroad you into preferring one or the other. Not everyone wants to be a saint or hardass.

Perfect example with the carrot and the stick. That's exactly what I was getting at. Then again, sometimes its best to use both the carrot *and* the stick. 

[Obsidian Gryphon]

Paragon for me simply means choosing the greater danger (for ME).I believe that's how  Shep would have chosen (well that's how the char is to me). A good/compassionate action doesn't necessarily mean a good end as the future is unpredictable. It may turn out the opposite but there will be no regrets. 

Since the Reapers are coming, it's a given that many will be indoctrinated; anyone everyone that falls to them. None will be spared, there is no escape. Organics will be decimated. One more foe in the fray in a seemingly hopeless fight against overwhelming enemies doesn't make much difference except to make the end faster. But one more ally means a better chance of survival. It could tip the scale, slim as it is but little as it is, it is better than to look around at even less choices.

[Repearized Miranda]

Myzzrimm wrote...

Valentia X wrote...

Myzzrimm wrote...

I support this 100%. Also, I'd wish charm to be a skill independant of morality- I play fitting the situation, not just all renegade or all paragon. Different situations call for different solutions, after all., but if you're more neutral, you're basically punished for it.

*sigh*. Fair point, op.

Yeah, that's how I feel about it. I'm a renagon with a pro-galactic agenda who just isn't all that friendly.

It annoys me because (and this is just my opinion) being unpredictable should net you some interesting results. Sometimes you have to use the stick, and sometimes you have to use the carrot, and I hate how the game seems to railroad you into preferring one or the other. Not everyone wants to be a saint or hardass.

Perfect example with the carrot and the stick. That's exactly what I was getting at. Then again, sometimes its best to use both the carrot *and* the stick. 

But wait! Everybody wants to have his or her cake and eat it, too. That's not entirely possible either. And to VX, well, just constantly swap blue & red answers; however, it's not that simple either as milking either end of the spectrum. The game doesn't "railroad" you as the constant swap may open up those major choices.

I ended up with a 56:124 (estimated) ratio. Which mean "neutral-philosophy" would average out to 1:1 (90:90)

Given this case, how exactly is that "railroading" you balanced both tips of the scale? I see how one side "could" be favored, but it doesn't mean it is which is why the debate ensues. Nobody is being "railroaded." Many choose to believe this despite this not beng what the game is doing. Some blue choices are red in consequences while red choices are likewise blue in consequences. (ie: Elnora - though that probably won't mean much)

What I am seeing is:

"The yellow (orange on the left) choices should mean "more" than the red or blue ones." (ie: being called to diffuse a fight, but saying "I'm staying out of this"? What if that has a bigger consequence then than trying to diffuse it?)

"The opposite of love (paragon) is not hate (renegade). It's indifference. (Neutral)" which closely coincides with this one: "If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything."

I do hear what you're saying though.

[A SILENT EMU]

Completely agree. Being such as nice guy isn't always the best option. Sometimes you have to make the hard decision. What if the Rachni turned against us after releasing the queen? That is just one example. There really should be some repercussions to some of the paragon decisions as well as the renegade ones.

[Undertone]

Mr.Kusy wrote...

My uncle works at BioWare and he told me that if you were a renegade you will loose. And go to hell.

You win the intelligence award for today.

As for this thread it's full of win just like any other thread done in the past. Enough with the magic-blue-win-button that works out every situation.

[Ryzaki]

...The OP seems to be under the mistaken impression that renegade doesn't equal win. 

Uh..no. Commander Shepard wins regardless. Renegade or Paragon. 

Now I wouldn't mind both renegade and paragon choices biting Shepard in the ass. That would be fun. Killing certain people screws renegade Shepard over and letting others live screw paragon Shepard over. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 05 juillet 2011 - 04:42 .

[Raiil]

Repearized Miranda wrote...



But wait! Everybody wants to have his or her cake and eat it, too. That's not entirely possible either. And to VX, well, just constantly swap blue & red answers; however, it's not that simple either as milking either end of the spectrum. The game doesn't "railroad" you as the constant swap may open up those major choices.

I ended up with a 56:124 (estimated) ratio. Which mean "neutral-philosophy" would average out to 1:1 (90:90)

Given this case, how exactly is that "railroading" you balanced both tips of the scale? I see how one side "could" be favored, but it doesn't mean it is which is why the debate ensues. Nobody is being "railroaded." Many choose to believe this despite this not beng what the game is doing. Some blue choices are red in consequences while red choices are likewise blue in consequences. (ie: Elnora - though that probably won't mean much)

What I am seeing is:

"The yellow (orange on the left) choices should mean "more" than the red or blue ones." (ie: being called to diffuse a fight, but saying "I'm staying out of this"? What if that has a bigger consequence then than trying to diffuse it?)

"The opposite of love (paragon) is not hate (renegade). It's indifference. (Neutral)" which closely coincides with this one: "If you don't stand for something, you'll fall for anything."

I do hear what you're saying though.

Hm. What I'm saying is that by not setting yourself into what seems to play as the saint or sinner complex of the game (or rather, holy paladin or epic doucherocket), there should be results orientated than that. If you're the enemy and you know that your opponent, Shepard, is compassionate and will do what they can to save someone, it's very easy to throw a Nihlus and bring an innocent in the mix in order to escape. If Shepard is willing to rain hellfire and brimstone to reach their goal, a hostage won't do much good and you need another plan. If Shepard is really difficult to read because they tend to have a 'your results may vary' responses, Shepard could effectively be more dangerous simply because you can't gauge their reaction.

By railroading, I mean that in order to basically diffuse fights, I either need to be the light at the end of the tunnel, or the light at the end of the tunnel that's actually just a giant fire. Apparently being the commander and a total badass isn't enough for some of my crew; I've got to be basically blue or orange. Instead of... whatever you get when you mix blue and orange together.

I often choose paragon choices on a large scale- I saved the rachni, saved the council, saved the sick batarian, encouraged Miranda to hug her little sister and sent the Collector base to the big Spare Parts Department in the Sky- but I also nuked the geth, chose to let Jacob's father get beaten on by the hunters, watched Sidonis die with a clear conscience and told the Admiralty Board exactly where they could stick their political bs. Plus I tend to be a complete and utter dick to anyone who doesn't serve on the Normandy (and to certain ex-crewmates/lovers). My Shepard has a definite view on right versus wrong and it doesn't always slide with the paragon/renegade scale, especially when some of those choices make absolutely no sense (re: A House Divided, the dialogue options and final option). 


I feel that for people who play like me- maybe conflicted, maybe they're just chaotic/neutral good or they simply suck at making decisions- shouldn't get cuffed upside the head because we enjoy the RP aspect and our characters aren't knight templars or noble demons.

YMMV, of course.

/soapbox

Modifié par Valentia X, 05 juillet 2011 - 04:49 .

[Nashiktal]

Ryzaki wrote...

...The OP seems to be under the mistaken impression that renegade doesn't equal win. 

Uh..no. Commander Shepard wins regardless. Renegade or Paragon. 

Now I wouldn't mind both renegade and paragon choices biting Shepard in the ass. That would be fun. Killing certain people screws renegade Shepard over and letting others live screw paragon Shepard over. 

This.

I would prefer that whether you go renagade or paragon not punish you, but instead just give you a different and unique situation.

If I played video games to be "punished" I would go play demon souls, or battle toads.

[mauro2222]

A SILENT EMU wrote...

Completely agree. Being such as nice guy isn't always the best option. Sometimes you have to make the hard decision. What if the Rachni turned against us after releasing the queen? That is just one example. There really should be some repercussions to some of the paragon decisions as well as the renegade ones.

Well, hard decision is not equal to renegade, and we can´t live from "what if", killing the rachni queen is just the same as saying "I will kill you because I don´t want any responsabilities for your behavior and its easier than solve the problem".

There really should be some repercussions to some of the paragon decisions as well as the renegade ones.

I support this :happy:

[Skirata129]

here we go... people saying they think renegades are selfish. if you look at the major decisions, USUALLY bioware got those right and made it so renegade = pragmatic and paragon = moralistic. it's only in everyday conversation they make the renegade out to be an ass and paragons to be holier than thou pricks. that really makes no sense from a real life perspective. people who want to get the job done might be ****s or not, people who are moral can be understanding without judging. conversation has little to do with work ethos.

[In Exile]

Valentia X wrote...
I think in terms of what people are saying, paragons basically never have anything come back to bite them in the ass, with the fairly minor exception of Elnora. Additionally, not all renegade options are jerkish, and some make a lot of sense. And sometimes it's a jerkass with a heart of gold scenario.

Which renegade options in ME1 make sense and should have potential rewards? I'm honestly curious,

ME2 absolutely has renegade decisions I see as being reasonably better than paragon ones (the genophage and the geth ship, for example).

Or, essentially, sometimes taking the not nice road should reap better dividends, instead of being reduced to a holy paladin. Sometimes hard decisions have to be made and bad things happen to good people- not because we want it, but because the greater good demands it. What if it comes down to letting a planet full of colonists getting nuked in order to save half an army that will go on to trample the Big Bad?

ME never gave a hard choice like that. The closest you come to is the Bring Down the Sky DLC.

[upsettingshorts]

Concentrate on Sovereign - it gives 1 more Renegade than Paragon point, but is "Neutral"

Kill the Rachni (too big of a risk to simply just LEAVE THE DOOR OPEN and take the Queen's word for it)

...a few minor ones I imagine.

...and Bring Down the Sky, as you mention

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 05 juillet 2011 - 05:13 .

[AlanC9]

In Exile wrote...

Which renegade options in ME1 make sense and should have potential rewards? I'm honestly curious,

Does choosing to concentrate on Sovereign rather than saving the Destiny Ascencion count? (Whoops -- ninja'd by 'Shorts)

Though  I guess letting the council die is its own reward

Modifié par AlanC9, 05 juillet 2011 - 05:15 .

[Repearized Miranda]

^ No, no. IA, but even by nor making a decision is in fact making one.

Now, with Legion's situation, it only makes no sense because it is logically a no-win situation - you have those. Save one or save millions? People will die. Something of this magnitude is not solved by simply saying: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

Legion's LM makes lots of sense, but folks are over-analyzing it.

Rewriting could actually be worse than destroying because those re-written may turn on you (look at Cerberus). Destroying those may mean that "you didn't get them all" angering the ones still active, thus coming after you, too. (Again, see Cerberus as if you take out the entire Army, odds are you've still got TIM to deal with)

Both scenarios could end up bad which makes perfect sense.

Again, I get you wanting indifference, but eventually it'll lead you to a "yes or no" decision - there's really no getting around it.

Save the world or let all go to hell? Whatever happens, happens. This game is a gamble, but how are you going to win anything if you're afraid to lose when you may have to lose alot before you win some?

Can't win them all!

[Raiil]

In Exile wrote...

Which renegade options in ME1 make sense and should have potential rewards? I'm honestly curious,

ME2 absolutely has renegade decisions I see as being reasonably better than paragon ones (the genophage and the geth ship, for example).

Killing Dr Heart (although I'm going to preface this entire response that a lot of this is probably YMMV) springs to mind. Mad scientist with no sense of ethics? Mordin Solus on the dark side? Although tbh ME1 sort of failed on the whole 'Renegade does not mean Evil is Dumb' thing.

In Exile wrote...

Or, essentially, sometimes taking the not nice road should reap better dividends, instead of being reduced to a holy paladin. Sometimes hard decisions have to be made and bad things happen to good people- not because we want it, but because the greater good demands it. What if it comes down to letting a planet full of colonists getting nuked in order to save half an army that will go on to trample the Big Bad?

ME never gave a hard choice like that. The closest you come to is the Bring Down the Sky DLC.

No, it hasn't, and what I'm saying is that I hope/would prefer that in ME3, that it does. I hope sometimes trying to save everyone or be the nice guy means not being able to save anyone, or save so little that it's almost meaningless, while having to make something closer to the Ashley versus Kaidan situation- only essentially, you're given the option to  attempt to opt out- means more survivors/supplies/soldiers.

Modifié par Valentia X, 05 juillet 2011 - 05:20 .

[mauro2222]

In game almost every renegade option that I made, were simply zero responsability, they all were "I don´t give a **** about the concequenses, and I don´t give a **** about the problem". I don´t know how this would be applied in real life, I can´t see renegade and paragon choices.

[Raiil]

Repearized Miranda wrote...

^ No, no. IA, but even by nor making a decision is in fact making one.

Now, with Legion's situation, it only makes no sense because it is logically a no-win situation - you have those. Save one or save millions? People will die. Something of this magnitude is not solved by simply saying: "The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few."

Legion's LM makes lots of sense, but folks are over-analyzing it.

Rewriting could actually be worse than destroying because those re-written may turn on you (look at Cerberus). Destroying those may mean that "you didn't get them all" angering the ones still active, thus coming after you, too. (Again, see Cerberus as if you take out the entire Army, odds are you've still got TIM to deal with)

Both scenarios could end up bad which makes perfect sense.

Again, I get you wanting indifference, but eventually it'll lead you to a "yes or no" decision - there's really no getting around it.

Save the world or let all go to hell? Whatever happens, happens. This game is a gamble, but how are you going to win anything if you're afraid to lose when you may have to lose alot before you win some?

Can't win them all!

I can't speak for everyone, but while A House Divided is my favourite loyalty mission bar none, the actual end option versus previous dialogue is borderline retarded because it's basically paragon 'brain washing is wrong! it is unethical! final paragon option: rewrite the geth!'

There's a lot of side-eyeing that goes on because the switch comes rather randomly with Legion basically not having an opinion on the matter and just about everyone but Thane and Jack (I think) rooting for the kill-switch based on the fact that they're geth, Jack saying that it's preferable to die as yourself rather than being nuked into obedience, and Thane saying there's really no moral difference- but he gets antsy if you choose the renegade 'they're just machines' responses. Shepard themselves don't really talk it through, just give a short blurb about why it's right/wrong, and then it changes for no apparent reason.

[upsettingshorts]

This seems like a good time to repost this one:

Upsettingshorts wrote...

PrimalEden wrote...

Not so much renegade options are being punished but rather that's what happens when you choose the options to shoot everyone. Karma is demonstrated that way. Not an issue of being good or bad in morals, but just the consequences of what is done to people and their reactions (or lack thereof).

Well the problem there is that I really don't think Mass Effect 1 or 2 does at all a good job at deciding what Renegade Shepard is.

Is he a coldly expedient problem solver? If so, he ought to be rewarded for doing the smart thing as opposed to the right thing. The reward for doing the right thing is feeling good about yourself, and having others feel good about you. Note: This is how I think he ought to be, as the right thing vs. smart thing makes for interesting decisions.

Is he a psychopathic bad-ass who kills for sport? If so, well... I have a hard time coming up with anything for this one. But plenty of Renegade actions in Mass Effect qualify for this label, no matter how little it makes sense for someone like that to rise to the rank of Lieutenant Commander in a civilized military force, let alone command the respect of level headed subordinates or a person like Captain Anderson.

Is he dedicated to human dominance in the galaxy? If so, he ought to be rewarded by the end of Mass Effect 3 with just that - humanity in control of the galaxy. The problem is this really only comes up in a small handful of major decisions (endgame of both ME1 and ME2, for example) and can't be the basis for his entire character. The downside is all the aliens hate you, but if you're roleplaying this Shepard, you don't really care about them.

Paragon Shepard however can be easily categorized: Right makes might. He's a good guy, he sets an example, and he still gets the job done. He's a consistent character. Renegade Shepard's inconsistency makes playing any of the above three options problematic, and impossible with any consistency.

Needless to say, combined with my earlier posts it's safe to say I think Renegade Shepard has a lot of problems.

Modifié par Upsettingshorts, 05 juillet 2011 - 05:26 .

[Virginian]

Mr.Kusy wrote...

My uncle works at BioWare and he told me that if you were a renegade you will loose. And go to hell.

True in life why not in games.

[In Exile]

Upsettingshorts wrote...

Concentrate on Sovereign - it gives 1 more Renegade than Paragon point, but is "Neutral"

Oh, it makes sense to choose it (I've never saved the Council other than to see how the world is like) but in that case, what positive outcome should follow from it? It makes perfect sense the galaxy is in a state of high tension over humanity's rise to the Council.

Kill the Rachni (too big of a risk to simply just LEAVE THE DOOR OPEN and take the Queen's word for it)

I agree here too, but in that case the reward is the absence of the rachni; whether or not they're good shouldn't affect the renegade calculus, which is "not worth it". It's essentially the opposite rationale with the Cerberus base.