1768 réponses à ce sujet

[Ryzaki]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

The "lead" bit was retconned, because Anderson makes it clear that he's not leading anything.  The choice has nothing to do with the epilogue options.  I consider them two seperate things.  You didn't know ahead of time that it would come to that.  And when did Shepard's personal feelings toward the Council matter concerning the public record?

Even if they wanted to take over, they could've done it in a manner that didn't condemn anyone

It was changed? I thought humanity headed the council in ME2 if you killed the council? It wasn't *only* humans but they held most of the reigns. ...unless I'm misremembering something? 

Shepard's feelings don't matter. What the alliance decides to do because of a power vaccum is what condemned them. 

I doubt it. People were already uneasy about humans to begin with. The only reason in the paragon ending everything is all sunshine is because humanity *didn't* take the easy route to power like the renegade tries to. They didn't prove all the fears of aliens right like the renegade side does. 

Thank you for acknowledging some of the lack of content for a non-Paragon side.

If they're going to follow the human dominance thing, then they should've done it.  Some upside could've been presented to the choice... if that becomes a true Renegade goal.  I personally don't think Renegade Shepard did that to take anything over... I think he still did that to save the galaxy with malice toward the Council (a case where it still wasn't worth the risk... but he didn't like the council anyway).

I always found human dominance over the galaxy to be sily. I wouldn't have minded *strengthening* of humanity by itself but trying to take over...just is too silly. It's too soon for humanity to manage that without it being contrived. It's equally silly that paragon Shep's decisions never blow up in his face. 

I'd really like some reasonable consequences. Not horrible like DA2 "no matter what you pick you FAIL" but not "oh you took over the galaxy? Everyone hates you but no one bothers doing anything about it but ****." or "Oh you brainwashed a bunch of geth even though the bot told you there was a chance of them all going bad! No worries that won't possibly go wrong!" are equally WAT to me. 

My paragades are genre savvy. They tended to cut the council off but he knew humanity would need to goodwill of the other species to get anywhere. What better way to get goodwill than by saving their government and asking for nothing in return? And it pretty much went just as planned for him. The turians eased off their backs, they got some power and everything ended up gravy. He still got the "ah yes 'reapers'." but the council wasn't anti-humanity.  

The renegade ending was human arrogance blowing up in humanity's face. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 10 juillet 2011 - 04:26 .

[Creativechick113]

I don't know... I have this really horrible feeling that tragedy, death and heartbreak are going to be what equals victory.

[GodWood]

Ryzaki wrote...
Harsh...It couldn't have been *that* bad. 

Yeah true.
I did get plenty of hours of entertainment out of the game's quests

But!
The gameplay was fundamentally broken and inferior to Morrowind in most ways.

Skyrim looks good though.
And fun fact! it has romances...

Ahem, but this would be much better suited for the Skyrim thread in Off Topic

Modifié par GodWood, 10 juillet 2011 - 04:24 .

[ThePwener]

@Ryzaki: It's just a game. BW just wants both experiences to be equally leveled no matter what you do. If the consequences were realistic, or happened all the time, 80% of people importing would have doomed themselves and would lose the war the second they import the game.

In other words: ME is stupid-proof

[Ryzaki]

ThePwener wrote...

@Ryzaki: It's just a game. BW just wants both experiences to be equally leveled no matter what you do. If the consequences were realistic, or happened all the time, 80% of people importing would have doomed themselves and would lose the war the second they import the game.

In other words: ME is stupid-proof

 

Sadly true. 
I wanted Balak to blow up something while Shepard was dead in celebration. But nooooooooo can't have that. <_< 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 10 juillet 2011 - 04:27 .

[ThePwener]

Creativechick113 wrote...

I don't know... I have this really horrible feeling that tragedy, death and heartbreak are going to be what equals victory.

I made a thread about that a few days ago. It went very well actually.

"Do we have to be as bad as the Reapers to defeat them?"

[Ryzaki]

Just a list now I suppose:
Mostly positive outcomes:

• - Saving the council
• - Killing Balak
• - Destroying the heretics
• - Saving the Collector Base
• - Saving Wrex
• - Having everyone survive the SM
• - Killing Vido
• - Killing Morinth
• - Killing Elnora
• - Expose Pitne For
• - Completing all the loyalty missions
• - Having Miranda talk to her sister
• - Having Grunt become part of Urdnot if Wrex is alive
•  Have Jack not kill Aresh (for Jack anyway)
• Sparing Sidonis (Yeah I know but still...I don't like the thought of Garrus killing like that)
• Destroying the Greybox
• Keeping Tali's dad experiments hidden
• Killing Talid (if you let the Council die)

Mostly negative outcomes

• - Kiling the Council
• - Sparing Balak
• - Rewriting the heretics
• - Killing Wrex
• - Leting Grunt join Urdnot with Wreav
• - Sparing Elnora
• - Killing Samara
• - Killing Talid (if spared the council)
• - Killing Aresh (for Jack)
• - Letting Kasumi keep the Greybox
• - Exposing Tali's father's experiments (war with geth once they find out)
• - Letting Legion transmit data to geth (same result as above)
• - Having most die on the SM
• - Not doing most (or all) of the loyalty missions
• - Let Pitne For keep smuggling.

Neutral (positive and negative end up balancing out)

• - Destroying CB
• - Killing Sidonis

I'll think of more later. 



 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 10 juillet 2011 - 05:16 .

[ThePwener]

Dude, some decisions there will really suck for you later. Im just saying... it will.... hopefully.... like it should! Oh what's the point.....

[Markinator_123]

Ryzaki wrote...

Frankly my prefereded decisions and results are 
Mostly positive outcomes:

• - Saving the council
• - Killing Balak
• - Destroying the heretics
• - Saving the Collector Base
• - Saving Wrex
• - Having everyone survive the SM
• - Killing Vido
• - Killing Morinth
• - Killing Elnora
• - Expose Pitne For
• - Completing all the loyalty missions
• - Having Miranda talk to her sister
• - Not letting Talid die (a human saved him from an alien. I think that would change his outlook on life a bit)
• - Having Grunt become part of Urdnot if Wrex is alive
•  Have Jack not kill Aresh (for Jack anyway)
• Sparing Sidonis (Yeah I know but still...I don't like the thought of Garrus killing like that)
• Destroying the Greybox
• Keeping Tali's dad experiments hidden

Mostly negative outcomes

• - Kiling the Council
• - Sparing Balak
• - Rewriting the heretics
• - Killing Wrex
• - Leting Grunt join Urdnot with Wreav
• - Sparing Elnora
• - Killing Samara
• - Killing Talid
• - Killing Aresh (for Jack)
• - Letting Kasumi keep the Greybox
• - Exposing Tali's father's experiments (war with geth once they find out)
• - Letting Legion transmit data to geth (same result as above)
• - Having most die on the SM
• - Not doing most (or all) of the loyalty missions
• - Let Pitne For keep smuggling.

Neutral (positive and negative end up balancing out)

• - Destroying CB

I'll think of more later. 

 

        I disagree with Council, Talid, and Sidonis. Those choices should be more neutral.

[Ryzaki]

I give you Talid and Sidonis but the renegade outcome (since it's humans dominated) is just too stupid to me to end up positive. 

A species that only been in the galaxy community less than half a century is suddenly gonna learn enough about it to take over? ...That doesn't make much sense and it reaks of Mary sueish. Shepard being Mc Sue is enough. We don't need humanity as a whole joining in. It should go horribly wrong. Human arrogance blowing up astronmically. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 10 juillet 2011 - 05:03 .

[Medhia Nox]

Paragons have to meet every Tuesday for a group discussion about their feelings, and the guy next to Shepard smells really bad.

How's that for a consequence?

Take that you no good Paragon hippies!

[GodWood]

Ryzaki wrote...
I give you Talid and Sidonis but the renegade outcome (since it's humans dominated) is just too stupid to me to end up positive.

I'd have it as
Kill Talid with the Council = negative
Kill Talid with the human council = positive.

Well not positive in any traditional sense but positive in a 'humanity dominates easier' kind of way.

[Ryzaki]

GodWood wrote...
I'd have it as
Kill Talid with the Council = negative
Kill Talid with the human council = positive.

Well not positive in any traditional sense but positive in a 'humanity dominates easier' kind of way.

That works really well. 

[Pharos]

What this entire thread boils down to is that renegade players want to be able to play through ME3 and at the end of it all go 'Ha! I told you so!' to all the paragons. I doubt that is going to happen...nor do I expect paragons will be able to do so either.

It'll all depend on the player anyway...the consequences of one decision may be acceptable to one player and not another despite the fact they both prefer to use the same in-game 'morality'. And how do we judge success anyway? Its all very subjective: to one player the virtual or total annihilation of one or more species as a consequence of their choices is acceptable, to another it would be utterly unacceptable, particularly if it is a species they like for one reason or other.

Paragon and Renegade decisions will both have 'good' and 'bad' conseqences...it is entirely up to the player (and what they judge to be acceptable or not) as to whether a decision was for the best.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Ryzaki wrote...
It was changed? I thought humanity headed the council in ME2 if you killed the council? It wasn't *only* humans but they held most of the reigns. ...unless I'm misremembering something? 

Yeah, they don't listen to Anderson, Humanity's place at the Council means less than the Paragon alternative.  He can't even call them to a meeting with Shepard.

Shepard's feelings don't matter. What the alliance decides to do because of a power vaccum is what condemned them. 

Which is Bioware's consequence for making the choice... it didn't have to play out that way.

I doubt it. People were already uneasy about humans to begin with. The only reason in the paragon ending everything is all sunshine is because humanity *didn't* take the easy route to power like the renegade tries to. They didn't prove all the fears of aliens right like the renegade side does. 

That's not a part of the Renegade Council choice... that's primarily Udina.  But even then, Shepard is considered a hero at the battle of the Citadel regardless... so apparently it's not all negative... but the game provides no content to indicate that. 

They saved the Citadel but lost the Council.  One point constantly missed is that the Citadel defense force didn't save the Council either... there's plenty of blame to go around... Bioware just turned the decisions into a negative light for the Renegade option.

What's even dumber is if it was a coup for Human dominance... why does the Human Council feel Shepard will "always put human interests before galactic concerns" and refuse to see him?  That makes absolutely no sense for a group that's about human interests.... especially considering that Shepard's been dead for the last 2 years.

I always found human dominance over the galaxy to be sily. I wouldn't have minded *strengthening* of humanity by itself but trying to take over...just is too silly. It's too soon for humanity to manage that without it being contrived. It's equally silly that paragon Shep's decisions never blow up in his face. 

I'd really like some reasonable consequences. Not horrible like DA2 "no matter what you pick you FAIL" but not "oh you took over the galaxy? Everyone hates you but no one bothers doing anything about it but ****." or "Oh you brainwashed a bunch of geth even though the bot told you there was a chance of them all going bad! No worries that won't possibly go wrong!" are equally WAT to me. 

My paragades are genre savvy. They tended to cut the council off but he knew humanity would need to goodwill of the other species to get anywhere. What better way to get goodwill than by saving their government and asking for nothing in return? And it pretty much went just as planned for him. The turians eased off their backs, they got some power and everything ended up gravy. He still got the "ah yes 'reapers'." but the council wasn't anti-humanity.  

The renegade ending was human arrogance blowing up in humanity's face. 

Renegade didn't let the Council die just so Humanity could take over.  There's a number of reasons, the Council almost stopped Shepard from chasing after Saren... who would've certainly succeeded in bringing the Reapers back... they made a lot of mistakes in doubting Shepard, shunning Anderson, and almost costing the galaxy everything... asking for help when the galaxy was in its gravest danger was likely the final nail in the coffin.  Additionally, the Council preached about making that kind of decision (to put the Galaxy first).

And even past the human Council plan, there's no payoff on that... we don't get to see them... we don't get to see what they're doing... there's just no content there (doesn't make sense).

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 10 juillet 2011 - 06:22 .

[Raiil]

Pharos wrote...

What this entire thread boils down to is that renegade players want to be able to play through ME3 and at the end of it all go 'Ha! I told you so!' to all the paragons. I doubt that is going to happen...nor do I expect paragons will be able to do so either.

It'll all depend on the player anyway...the consequences of one decision may be acceptable to one player and not another despite the fact they both prefer to use the same in-game 'morality'. And how do we judge success anyway? Its all very subjective: to one player the virtual or total annihilation of one or more species as a consequence of their choices is acceptable, to another it would be utterly unacceptable, particularly if it is a species they like for one reason or other.

Paragon and Renegade decisions will both have 'good' and 'bad' conseqences...it is entirely up to the player (and what they judge to be acceptable or not) as to whether a decision was for the best.

Um... what?

I agree that there are some renegade players who ascribe to what you said in the first line, but not all of them. What most of us have been asking for/debating is basically consequences for everyone, some good, some bad.


The most basic way I can think to put it is an example from Virmire. At two points, basically back to back, you have the opportunity to release a salarian from their holding cells. Paragoning both results in you setting them free. Renegading both leaves them locked up/presumably dead. If you paragon both:

One of them thanks you and runs off screen and out of the story.
One of them has been indoctrinated and you end up having to kill them.

That is what I want to see more of in the story. I have two Shepards, a paragon and a renegon, and the renegon tends to be a big bag of jerkass to people, but about 75% of the time makes the paragon decision, so I miss a very small amount of content, if any at all. I would like to get shot in the face with the fact that by being merciful, I have set my own cause back. I would like to, with some of these, get validation that being pragmatic, even if it's not necessarily my first choice, was the right decision. I want this just as much as I enjoy seeing Shiala again, helping the Zhu's Hope people (she's a personal favourite and the only time my Shepard enjoyed embracing eternity) and as much as I like hearing the positive comments from the shopkeepers in the Citadel because I saved the council. 

I want variety.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Pharos wrote...

Paragon and Renegade decisions will both have 'good' and 'bad' conseqences...it is entirely up to the player (and what they judge to be acceptable or not) as to whether a decision was for the best.

That's the hope.. because thusfar, the Paragons have not had "bad" consequences and Renegades have not had "good" consequences for their choices compared to eachother.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 10 juillet 2011 - 06:20 .

[Ryzaki]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
Yeah, they don't listen to Anderson, Humanity's place at the Council means less than the Paragon alternative.  He can't even call them to a meeting with Shepard.

Is Anderson the only human on the council in that case though? 

Which is Bioware's consequence for making the choice... it didn't have to play out that way.

True. But like I said before, they did the same thing to my racist Shepard. You might as well get used to it. Focus on future consequences because the citadel choice is already done. 

That's not a result of the Renegade Council choice... that's primarily Udina.  But even then, Shepard is considered a hero at the battle of the Citadel regardless... so apparently it's not all negative... but the game provides no content to indicate that.  
They saved the Citadel but lost the Council.  One point constantly missed is that the Citadel defense force didn't save the Council either... there's plenty of blame to go around... Bioware just turned the decisions into a negative light for the Renegade option. What's even dumber is if it was a coup for Human dominance... why does the Human Council feel Shepard will "always put human interests before galactic concerns?"  That makes absolutely no sense for a group that's about human interests.

Frankly I don't think they care about the council as much as the coup in the renegade ending. (which is why the neutral option should've been the one that stuck. I don't know what BW was thinking with the renegade option. Someone must've been high. 

It doesn't it's probably one of those choices that BW halfassed (not like that's anything new). 

But really I don't think we're gonna find a common ground. My view on this choice is it's stupid and should've never been possible. The neutral option made far more sense. 

Renegade didn't let the Council die just so Humanity could take over.  There's a number of reasons, the Council almost stopped Shepard from chasing after Saren... who would've certainly succeeded in bringing the Reapers back... they made a lot of mistakes in doubting Shepard, shunning Anderson, and almost costing the galaxy everything... asking for help when the galaxy was in its gravest danger was likely the final nail in the coffin.  Additionally, the Council preached about making that kind of decision (to put the Galaxy first).

And even past the human Council plan, there's no payoff on that... we don't get to see them... we don't get to see what they're doing... there's just no content there (doesn't make sense).

Really? I could've sworn that was highly suggested in the renegade ending and the whole "leave the council to die." dialogue choice. 

Though I do agree on not seeing the human council being silly. They should've at least showed up and told Shepard to shove his head up his ass before leaving. (assuming that it's only aliens) 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 10 juillet 2011 - 06:22 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Ryzaki wrote...
Is Anderson the only human on the council in that case though? 

In the Neutral one, the Council is human-led (Anderson) but consists of aliens like before.

True. But like I said before, they did the same thing to my racist Shepard. You might as well get used to it. Focus on future consequences because the citadel choice is already done. 

You're right, but the point of this complaint is to make sure they don't do something like that again.

Frankly I don't think they care about the council as much as the coup in the renegade ending. (which is why the neutral option should've been the one that stuck. I don't know what BW was thinking with the renegade option. Someone must've been high. 

It doesn't it's probably one of those choices that BW halfassed (not like that's anything new). 

But really I don't think we're gonna find a common ground. My view on this choice is it's stupid and should've never been possible. The neutral option made far more sense. 

I personally always pick the neutral option in that scenario.  And it's easy for writers and artists to miss things when they're nose-deep into it.  Reminding them via a complaint can help... here's hoping they take notice of this thread.

Really? I could've sworn that was highly suggested in the renegade ending and the whole "leave the council to die." dialogue choice. 

Though I do agree on not seeing the human council being silly. They should've at least showed up and told Shepard to shove his head up his ass before leaving. (assuming that it's only aliens) 

He mentioned that the Council had always been holding them back (in which I thought of Anderson's spectre status and their general mistakes made regarding Saren, Sovereign, and the Geth).

Truth be told, I think a Renegade Shepard arguement against the new alien Council would've been awesome to see... they could've come to a bickering level of respect and understanding of eachother.  That would've been awesome and a cameo that matches the Paragon alternative... instead of the complete no-show that Renegade/Neutral Shepards recieve.

That could've even happened with an all-human Council...still would've been awesome.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 10 juillet 2011 - 06:34 .

[ThePwener]

Frankly, I'll be disappointed if any combination of decisions can still lead to victory.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

ThePwener wrote...

Frankly, I'll be disappointed if any combination of decisions can still lead to victory.

I think every time calls for their own measures regarding what would present the most positive outcome.  There are no one-size-fits-all solutions to things in real life.  It'd be awesome if Mass Effect adopted that philosophy instead of keeping the most positive outcomes exclusive to the Paragon choices.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 10 juillet 2011 - 06:37 .

[Ryzaki]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
In the Neutral one, the Council is human-led (Anderson) but consists of aliens like before.

I'm pretty sure the neutral ending is ignored completely. 

I also thought the neutral ending did *not* have humanity leading the council. Only the renegade one did. 

You're right, but the point of this complaint is to make sure they don't do something like that again.

That I fully agree with. No more stupid as hell decisions that are riculously unlikely please. 

I personally always pick the neutral option in that scenario.  And it's easy for writers and artists to miss things when they're nose-deep into it.  Reminding them via a complaint can help... here's hoping they take notice of this thread.

It is they somehow ignored the fact that Shepard does *not* have to be friendly with all his crew. Yet somehow everyone's friends. Bleh. 

He mentioned that the Council had always been holding them back (in which I thought of Anderson's spectre status and their general mistakes made regarding Saren, Sovereign, and the Geth).

Truth be told, I think a Renegade Shepard arguement against the new alien Council would've been awesome to see... they could've come to a bickering level of respect and understanding of eachother.  That would've been awesome and a cameo that matches the Paragon alternative... instead of the complete no-show that Renegade/Neutral Shepards recieve.

That could've even happened with an all-human Council...still would've been awesome.

 

Ah. 

It would've been funny but I doubt they would've listened to him long. 

The all human council *should've* been grateful though. 

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Ryzaki wrote...

I'm pretty sure the neutral ending is ignored completely. 

I also thought the neutral ending did *not* have humanity leading the council. Only the renegade one did. 

The neutral Council is human-led.  The Renegade Council is all-human.

That I fully agree with. No more stupid as hell decisions that are riculously unlikely please. 

Agreed in so many words, lol

It is they somehow ignored the fact that Shepard does *not* have to be friendly with all his crew. Yet somehow everyone's friends. Bleh. 

Have you seen Gran Torino (Clint Eastwood)?  People can be nice and have friends even if they're mean, lol.  It becomes a sort of charm.

Ah. 

It would've been funny but I doubt they would've listened to him long. 

The all human council *should've* been grateful though. 

lol that would've been even more win if the council cut off Shepard this time (a 'that's how it feels' moment), agreed.  A Renegade Shepard could've even kinda liked them because they stay out of his way...

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 10 juillet 2011 - 06:44 .

[Ryzaki]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote..

The neutral Council is human-led.  The Renegade Council is all-human.

There is no neutral council in ME2. Only the renegade or paragon choices were taken into account I believe. 

There was a whole debate on it. I forgot where it is but yeah the council ending follows the renegade ending the neutral choice is completely ignored. There's no reason for the aiens to be so hostile if you're following the renegade choice. Edit Found it here it is. 
Huh. Looks like it's bugged so only non-import Shepards get it * It's bugged which is why the whole "WTF" area is coming from. The diffences are here. 

Edit: And it looks like paragons should *not* be getting the "humans should be self sufficent" comment. >_> 

Have you seen Gran Torino (Clint Eastwood)?  People can be nice and have friends even if they're mean, lol.  It becomes a sort of charm.

Not when someone says he finds your kind "disgusting" and "get away from me turian" while ignoring you. That's not friendship. 

lol that would've been even more win if the council cut off Shepard this time (a 'that's how it feels' moment), agreed.  A Renegade Shepard could've even kinda liked them because they stay out of his way...

Normal council always stays out of your way. But I'm gonna be honest the number 1 reason I save the council is because I want my "ah yes 'reapers'." moment in ME3. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 10 juillet 2011 - 07:48 .