1768 réponses à ce sujet

[Ieldra]

JamesStark wrote...
I don't think we should get punished for be paragon though.
I don't think renagades should either.

That's not what we're asking. We're asking this:

(1) Some Renegade decisions are pragmatic in nature. They sacrifice the immediate good because that is seen as necessary to achieve a greater good down the road that the Paragon alternative will not achieve. We ask that that greater good *sometimes* manifests, resulting in a "better" outcome than the Paragon alternative. Example: The intact Collector base will in the end give us such a great advantage in fighting the Reapers that the fact that it has strengthened Cerberus becomes insignificant in comparison.

(2) Some Paragon decisions specifically run the risk of invoking a greater evil down the road along with the immediate good they achieve. We ask that this greater evil *sometimes* manifests. Example: the Rachni turn against you or are all indoctrinated in ME3.

[mauro2222]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...


Yes,

Well that settles the debate then. It's been fun. Chalk up another one for Saphra.

Was there any doubt?

Somebody wants to feed her ego

[Medhia Nox]

@Ieldra2 - and, if you assaulted a news reporter, I hope your Shepard goes to jail for a good long time.

You seem to just want your style of play applauded - and the style of play you find "place whatever vitriolic word here" to be punished.

If you're an a-hole in real life - new friends don't just come along to fill the space. You end up alone and uncared for. That's not "misanthropes" being punished - that's a douche getting what he asked for.

[Markinator_123]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Ieldra2 - and, if you assaulted a news reporter, I hope your Shepard goes to jail for a good long time.

You seem to just want your style of play applauded - and the style of play you find "place whatever vitriolic word here" to be punished.

If you're an a-hole in real life - new friends don't just come along to fill the space. You end up alone and uncared for. That's not "misanthropes" being punished - that's a douche getting what he asked for.

What Ieldra2 means is that we don't make choices because we want to be a douchebag. We make some unpleasant choices because we believe they are better in the long run.

Modifié par Markinator_123, 09 juillet 2011 - 10:50 .

[Nerevar-as]

Ieldra2 wrote...

(2) Some Paragon decisions specifically run the risk of invoking a greater evil down the road along with the immediate good they achieve. We ask that this greater evil *sometimes* manifests. Example: the Rachni turn against you or are all indoctrinated in ME3.

GENOCIDE OF A SAPIENT SPECIES. 

I´ll take the risk, thanks. This one seems to be shaping to have both good and bad consequences however. More husks (and I really hope renegades don´t get them) vs less help for the counterattack on Earth.

The decision I struggle more with was Balak: 3 innocent lives vs letting a terrorist who tried to destroy a whole planet go. Are they worth the risk?

[mauro2222]

Markinator_123 wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Ieldra2 - and, if you assaulted a news reporter, I hope your Shepard goes to jail for a good long time.

You seem to just want your style of play applauded - and the style of play you find "place whatever vitriolic word here" to be punished.

If you're an a-hole in real life - new friends don't just come along to fill the space. You end up alone and uncared for. That's not "misanthropes" being punished - that's a douche getting what he asked for.

What Ieldra2 means is that we don't make choices because we want to be a douchebag. We make some unpleasant choices because we believe they are better in the long run.

Like punching the news reporter?

[Markinator_123]

mauro2222 wrote...

Markinator_123 wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Ieldra2 - and, if you assaulted a news reporter, I hope your Shepard goes to jail for a good long time.

You seem to just want your style of play applauded - and the style of play you find "place whatever vitriolic word here" to be punished.

If you're an a-hole in real life - new friends don't just come along to fill the space. You end up alone and uncared for. That's not "misanthropes" being punished - that's a douche getting what he asked for.

What Ieldra2 means is that we don't make choices because we want to be a douchebag. We make some unpleasant choices because we believe they are better in the long run.

Like punching the news reporter?

Not all renegade choices are like that (I personally always use the intimidation option for her). We are talking about choices like the council, balak, collector base, rachni, heretics, and choosing rather to spare/eliminate potentially dangerous foes.

[Nerevar-as]

Markinator_123 wrote...


Not all renegade choices are like that (I personally always use the intimidation option for her). We are talking about choices like the council, balak, collector base, rachni, heretics, and choosing rather to spare/eliminate potentially dangerous foes.

Renegade usually involves sacrificing others (often innocents) in order to take no risks (CB is other way around however - is the Paragon who doesn´t trust TIM enough). There are many things even Jack Bauer wouldn´t do in renegade choices. Even if it´s effective, how necessary it is is debatable, and under no circumstances should make you popular. So you might (should?) get an easier run in ME3, but also don´t expect to be praised for it.

[Markinator_123]

Nerevar-as wrote...

Markinator_123 wrote...


Not all renegade choices are like that (I personally always use the intimidation option for her). We are talking about choices like the council, balak, collector base, rachni, heretics, and choosing rather to spare/eliminate potentially dangerous foes.

Renegade usually involves sacrificing others (often innocents) in order to take no risks (CB is other way around however - is the Paragon who doesn´t trust TIM enough). There are many things even Jack Bauer wouldn´t do in renegade choices. Even if it´s effective, how necessary it is is debatable, and under no circumstances should make you popular. So you might (should?) get an easier run in ME3, but also don´t expect to be praised for it.

So are you saying that Paragon choices should get all of the praise while renegade choices get belitted and ridiculed? How popular would Shepard be if news got out that he/she had the opportunity to nail a dangerous terrorist that almost killed 4 million and refused to do so? I'm sure the galaxy at large wouldn't be to happy that Shepard unleashed the rachni back into the galaxy especially considering how much it took to wipe them out. Many humans could also be very upset that Shepard sacrificed many human lives and ships to save a council that doesn't give a crap about them. The point I am trying to make is that the Paragon choices can be considered just as controversial as the renegade choices. It is not a one way street in this area.

[mauro2222]

Markinator_123 wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

Markinator_123 wrote...


Not all renegade choices are like that (I personally always use the intimidation option for her). We are talking about choices like the council, balak, collector base, rachni, heretics, and choosing rather to spare/eliminate potentially dangerous foes.

Renegade usually involves sacrificing others (often innocents) in order to take no risks (CB is other way around however - is the Paragon who doesn´t trust TIM enough). There are many things even Jack Bauer wouldn´t do in renegade choices. Even if it´s effective, how necessary it is is debatable, and under no circumstances should make you popular. So you might (should?) get an easier run in ME3, but also don´t expect to be praised for it.

So are you saying that Paragon choices should get all of the praise while renegade choices get belitted and ridiculed? How popular would Shepard be if news got out that he/she had the opportunity to nail a dangerous terrorist that almost killed 4 million and refused to do so? I'm sure the galaxy at large wouldn't be to happy that Shepard unleashed the rachni back into the galaxy especially considering how much it took to wipe them out. Many humans could also be very upset that Shepard sacrificed many human lives and ships to save a council that doesn't give a crap about them. The point I am trying to make is that the Paragon choices can be considered just as controversial as the renegade choices. It is not a one way street in this area.

The difference that I see is that Paragon, takes moral and care while doing his mission, he/she puts the safety of life first and takes responsabilitie on the consequences of not finishing the mission, while Renegade puts the mission over life, so he/she gives a **** on everyone and solves the mission because he/she has fear of dealing with the consequences of not doing so.

And yes, paragon should be punished and renegade too.

Modifié par mauro2222, 09 juillet 2011 - 11:26 .

[Nerevar-as]

Markinator_123 wrote...

Nerevar-as wrote...

Markinator_123 wrote...


Not all renegade choices are like that (I personally always use the intimidation option for her). We are talking about choices like the council, balak, collector base, rachni, heretics, and choosing rather to spare/eliminate potentially dangerous foes.

Renegade usually involves sacrificing others (often innocents) in order to take no risks (CB is other way around however - is the Paragon who doesn´t trust TIM enough). There are many things even Jack Bauer wouldn´t do in renegade choices. Even if it´s effective, how necessary it is is debatable, and under no circumstances should make you popular. So you might (should?) get an easier run in ME3, but also don´t expect to be praised for it.

So are you saying that Paragon choices should get all of the praise while renegade choices get belitted and ridiculed? How popular would Shepard be if news got out that he/she had the opportunity to nail a dangerous terrorist that almost killed 4 million and refused to do so? I'm sure the galaxy at large wouldn't be to happy that Shepard unleashed the rachni back into the galaxy especially considering how much it took to wipe them out. Many humans could also be very upset that Shepard sacrificed many human lives and ships to save a council that doesn't give a crap about them. The point I am trying to make is that the Paragon choices can be considered just as controversial as the renegade choices. It is not a one way street in this area.

So how popular would be someone who would sacrifice the people s/he should be protecting from said terrorists? Who is able to justify to him/herself genocide? What do you think people who watch humanity make a power grab and being hated for it by aliens who outgun us (AFAIK only Citadel fleet was damaged by Sovie) and could decide they´ve taken enough?

As you say, it works both ways. Same way some are annoyed someone who is almost a messianic figure is successful, others are because a complete monster can too. Personally I´d do away with the morality meter, bring back perusasion skill, and use the Witcher motto: no good or evil, just choices and consequences. And I expect (and hope) some of my paragon choices will come back to bite me.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

The entire issue is that the most positive outcomes have been going one-way for Paragon decisions over Renegade decisions.

I like not knowing which outcome's going to give me the most postiive outcome before I even hear what the choice is... may be just me...

For the record, the choices available has nothing to do with a Paragon/Renegade attitude.  A Renegade decision could've been said in a Paragon manner... it wouldn't have changed the actual choice.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 10 juillet 2011 - 12:36 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...


Yes,

Well that settles the debate then. It's been fun. Chalk up another one for Saphra.

Was there any doubt?

It's a book. Before computers and the internet were invented, it was the primary thing words were written on.

[Dean_the_Young]

mauro2222 wrote...

Markinator_123 wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Ieldra2 - and, if you assaulted a news reporter, I hope your Shepard goes to jail for a good long time.

You seem to just want your style of play applauded - and the style of play you find "place whatever vitriolic word here" to be punished.

If you're an a-hole in real life - new friends don't just come along to fill the space. You end up alone and uncared for. That's not "misanthropes" being punished - that's a douche getting what he asked for.

What Ieldra2 means is that we don't make choices because we want to be a douchebag. We make some unpleasant choices because we believe they are better in the long run.

Like punching the news reporter?

Since when is punching the reporter the One True Representative Renegade choice... despite the other Renegade persuasions and non-persuasions a Shepard can take in the same conversations?

[Arijharn]

Pharos wrote...
Teltin and Overlord are products of Cerberus' mindset...depending on how you play the game Shep's actions throughout the events of ME2 are completely contrary to that mindset. Who get's the medals/recognition in a war? The officers and soldiers who fight it or the Government who pays them? Cerberus may get a handful of kudos for funding a paragon Shepard but no one is going to believe the change in MO is anything else but Shep's influence through his control of the operational side of the mission.

Funnily enough; I don't think anything you just said invalidates my statement mainly because Cerberus is about putting humanity first, and although their execution can suck at some times; Shephard's actions as a proxy agent further validates this. Shephard at the end of the day collects his paycheck from Cerberus (barring two or three situations?)

Cerberus does things like Teltin and Overlord to give humanity the edge or to (as far as their theory holds) to further protect humanity down the line, or do you think that Teltin and Overlord was greenlit because it would guarantee to cause human casualties (and thus be somewhat contrariwise to the stated goals of 'human advancement.')?

The talk about medals/recognition obviously isn't going to go to Cerberus; because Cerberus wouldn't publicly announce that it was them who orchestrated the retalitory strikes that saved the human colonies; but that doesn't mean they couldn't gain some benefit from the situation; namely extra money in their wallet from pleased benefactors.

[Arijharn]

Ryzaki wrote...

Uh no it's called good will and history. They'll stick their necks out for humaniy because they know if push comes for shove humans will do the same thing. Give and take, something any child with common sense learns early on. Exactly why if you save the council the Turians and humans are starting to get along and the alien races are *trying* (sending aid vessals) to the disappearing colonies. Sadly since the council is such idiots nothing can else be done. 

The two will start you know...working together. Has less to do with "humans are nice" and more to do with "humans are dependable". Since they know they can count on humans (and aren't gearing up for a war after the Reapers are gone) they don't need to be extremely self reliant and make sure they're not at all vulnerable so humanity can grab even more power. They'll help save humanity because shock of shock a dependable ally that you actually like is a good thing .

I am not arguing that they'll send all their battleships. That's not nice thats stupid. But they will more than likely be willin to sacrifice ships and resources to humanity that they wouldn't otherwise. 

Honestly; I think goodwill only gets you so far in international politics, and I can't imagine that being in any situation more so than some sort of extinction level event. 

It's also a fallacy I think to say that Renegade shephard's can't cajole the other species into acting either by saying: "Look, you might not like us, but we're in this together. Do you honestly expect the Reapers to just withdraw back into Dark space after they finish smashing humanity? Can you afford to take that risk?"

I mean; you can be all manipulative about it too and appeal to say the Turian concept of honor and get them to help by throwing words around like civic duty etc, etc.

I do kinda find it funny though how you just automatically assume Renegade's would be screwed because of this choice though.

[ObserverStatus]

Oh look, it's another paragon/renegade rivalry thread.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

As far as I'm concerned, it's Paragon choices against all other choices available. Favoritism is still the issue. 

Knowing that the story positively wraps around one kind of choice exclusively.... ruins the notion of making a 'tough choice' for the most positive outcome.

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

[DaringMoosejaw]

bobobo878 wrote...

Oh look, it's another paragon/renegade rivalry thread.

RAH RAH RED TEAM GOOOOOO! I hope Blue team bleeds from ALL of their orifices! All the time! Forever! WOO RED TEAM WE ROCK!

It's exactly like politics, except somehow more pathetic.

Modifié par DaringMoosejaw, 10 juillet 2011 - 01:09 .

[ObserverStatus]

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

Oh look, it's another paragon/renegade rivalry thread.

RAH RAH RED TEAM GOOOOOO! I hope Blue team bleeds from ALL of their orifices! All the time! Forever! WOO RED TEAM WE ROCK!


It's exactly like politics, except somehow more pathetic.

If my favorite alignment gets the worse ending, anybody want to get drunk with me and flip over cars?

Modifié par bobobo878, 10 juillet 2011 - 01:10 .

[Ryzaki]

Arijharn wrote...

Honestly; I think goodwill only gets you so far in international politics, and I can't imagine that being in any situation more so than some sort of extinction level event.

It will however get you some extra ships that they'd probably keep for themselves otherwise. Same with certain blueprints and weapon schematics. (actually I'd love if saving the council got you access to certain weapons that you wouldn't get otherwise (same with saving the CB so it's balanced for paragons and renegades) 

It's also a fallacy I think to say that Renegade shephard's can't cajole the other species into acting either by saying: "Look, you might not like us, but we're in this together. Do you honestly expect the Reapers to just withdraw back into Dark space after they finish smashing humanity? Can you afford to take that risk?"

I mean; you can be all manipulative about it too and appeal to say the Turian concept of honor and get them to help by throwing words around like civic duty etc, etc.

I do kinda find it funny though how you just automatically assume Renegade's would be screwed because of this choice though.

 

Uh except the Reapers are *already* attacking the alien worlds. The renegades saying that is pointless. The aliens need to protect themselves. The Reapers are centered on earth yeah...but they're all over so can they really afford to take the risk of losing ships trying to defend Earth, ships that they need to protect themselves? Especially when they have never had humanity sacrifice anything to help them out? I'd go with a no. 

Except in the dead council ending I'm pretty sure the Turians and humanity are pretty damn close to coming to war. The turians were stockpiling weapons and ships I believe. 

Where did I say they'd be screwed?  I said the alien races would be more likely to stand back instead of sticking their necks out. That doesn't mean they'll get no aid at all. They'll just get less than someone who saved the council did. No army with a brain is gonna let themselves be weaknened helping out someone they percieve to be a potential enemy. On the other hand with an ally, that wouldn't be an issue. Thus why the aliens will be far more willing to stick their necks out for humanity if the groups are coexisting peacefully vs the renegade power grab that pisses everyone else off. 

That's pretty logical to me. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 10 juillet 2011 - 01:28 .

[C9316]

bobobo878 wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

Oh look, it's another paragon/renegade rivalry thread.

RAH RAH RED TEAM GOOOOOO! I hope Blue team bleeds from ALL of their orifices! All the time! Forever! WOO RED TEAM WE ROCK!


It's exactly like politics, except somehow more pathetic.

If my favorite alignment gets the worse ending, anybody want to get drunk with me and flip over cars?

Can we still get drunk and flip over cars even IF we get the better ending? If so count me in!

[Medhia Nox]

The primary complaint I've seen - is that Renegades lose friends. Not - "Renegades will be unable to finish the game." or "The game is harder for Renegades".

Actually - the game is marginally easier for Renegades. You skip a handful of fights by taking the scumbag route to combat. Most Renegades will say "smart" - but I think that only proves that smart people can be, or might primarily be, scumbags.

So - you lose friends. Which means you lose a few minutes of content. That's your real issue.. not the "story".

Do you really think Renegade Shepard won't be able to win the game? I've got news for you - Bioware is out to take your money (and rightfully so, they're working hard to entertain you), and they're going to let even the most incompetent player win.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Favoritism is the issue.

Knowing that the story positively wraps around one kind of choice exclusively.... ruins the notion of making a 'tough choice' for the most positive outcome.

[saMoorai]

C9316 wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

DaringMoosejaw wrote...

bobobo878 wrote...

Oh look, it's another paragon/renegade rivalry thread.

RAH RAH RED TEAM GOOOOOO! I hope Blue team bleeds from ALL of their orifices! All the time! Forever! WOO RED TEAM WE ROCK!


It's exactly like politics, except somehow more pathetic.

If my favorite alignment gets the worse ending, anybody want to get drunk with me and flip over cars?

Can we still get drunk and flip over cars even IF we get the better ending? If so count me in!

Can we just get Drunk and flip over cars NOW?