1768 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Ryzaki wrote...

And I love how every single paragon choice happens the best way ever even though only one paragon choice (the council) has actually given humanity a benefit. Everything else somehow is magically positive even if nothing's happened. I guess the consequence not happening immediately = postive now and someone saying they'll give you help later (you know...like Cerberus does)  = positive and nothing negative at all is possible. 

lol as far as the most positive outcomes, it's not just the Council choice...

To name a few based on what we know so far:

Collector Base
Fist
Zaeed
Balak
Rachni
Thorian Asari

etc. (what other Paragon vs Renegade decisions were there in ME1 and 2? lol)

As far as humanity is concerned, still better off with the paragon decisions thusfar.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 13 juillet 2011 - 09:37 .

[Ryzaki]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Ryzaki wrote...

And I love how every single paragon choice happens the best way ever even though only one paragon choice (the council) has actually given humanity a benefit. Everything else somehow is magically positive even if nothing's happened. I guess the consequence not happening immediately = postive now and someone saying they'll give you help later (you know...like Cerberus does)  = positive and nothing negative at all is possible. 

lol it's not just the Council choice...

To name a few based on what we know so far:

Collector Base
Fist
Zaeed
Balak
Rachni
Thorian Asari

etc. (what other Paragon vs Renegade decisions were there in ME1 and 2? lol)

I hate to burst your bubble but not a single one of those choices are completely positive. Hell we don't even know the full ramifications. 

CB - No clue. Cerberus maybe indoctrinated. Have to wait until ME3 to get the full story. 
Fist - a short cameo. You can also spare him as a renegade. He gives you nothing but a short and silly conversation. The scene where Wrex shoots him is about as long. Puleze. 
Balak- nothing happened with him period. He isn't reformed and he hasn't harmed anyone. But he could be building resources for a large show. We have no way of knowing. Saying he doesn't do anything is premature. 
Rachni- The queen promised Aid. They have yet to remeet the Reapers so we don't know if she'll once again fall under the sway of the Reapers. Saying otherwise is premature. 
Thorian Asari - considering she's turning green and having headaches again I dont' see this going well. Will have to wait until ME3 to find out. 

All this premature complaining is starting to make me shake my head. 

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Ryzaki wrote...
I hate to burst your bubble but not a single one of those choices are completely positive. Hell we don't even know the full ramifications. 

We know what we've seen across ME1 and 2.  And they are positive over the Renegade alternative... I'll explain:
 

CB - No clue. Cerberus maybe indoctrinated. Have to wait until ME3 to get the full story. 

CB - Absolutely no support from your crew in making the Renegade decision... even when some supported that decision before it was made.  The entire scenario wrapped around the pro-Paragon banner after the choice was made.  Such a reality-breaking change of heart can't go anywhere but in the Paragon's favor... yet alone the fact that Cerberus is the enemy that the Paragon ending tells of while the Renegade choosers are still scratching their heads (due to a harsher break in continuity compared to the Paragon scenario).

Fist - a short cameo. You can also spare him as a renegade. He gives you nothing but a short and silly conversation. The scene where Wrex shoots him is about as long. Puleze. 

He does nothing negative for keeping him alive... which means killing him served no positive benefit based on what's been presented.  Advantage, Paragon.

Balak- nothing happened with him period. He isn't reformed and he hasn't harmed anyone. But he could be building resources for a large show. We have no way of knowing. Saying he doesn't do anything is premature. 

Nothing happened with him... period.  Which means that as far as ME1 and 2 goes, innocent people are dead with nothing to show for it over the Paragon alternative.  Advantage, Paragon.

Rachni- The queen promised Aid. They have yet to remeet the Reapers so we don't know if she'll once again fall under the sway of the Reapers. Saying otherwise is premature. 

They've promised aid and have been heroes (saving the Rachni ambassador) thusfar.  As of ME2, the Rachni have been nothing but a positive.  Additionally, they actually showed up... when a Renegade choice could've easily resulted in a cameo appearance of some kind that stemmed from an exclusively Renegade choice.  Less content, less cameos, and less allies.  Advantage, Paragon.

Thorian Asari - considering she's turning green and having headaches again I dont' see this going well. Will have to wait until ME3 to find out. 

She's still helping Zhu's hope recover and are experiencing some side-effects of the spores that are still inside them.  As far as ME1 and 2 goes, they're taking care of things... and certainly better than them being dead at this point.  Shiala even offers you some friendly time.  Advantage, Paragon.

All this premature complaining is starting to make me shake my head. 

It's not premature when discussing the already released games.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 13 juillet 2011 - 10:03 .

[Ryzaki]

Right. I'm done. Go ahead. 

It's oh so obvious paragon gets preferential treatement. Right. Enjoy. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 13 juillet 2011 - 10:07 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Ryzaki wrote...

*shrugs*

Do you feel that twist favored Renegades instead?.. or perhaps they were equal?

So nothing happening means it's an advantage? Okay then.

Fist claims that he's being good now... not a saint... but not dirty either.  Are you saying that's not more positive than him being dead?

Same as before. 

Not quite, in this one there's still dead innocent people that thusfar died unnecessarily.

Right. Someone is gonna come out of nowhere and pat the renegade on the back for committing genocide. Once again. Okay then and still same as before. 

Again, it doesn't have to be from the Rachni or even related to the Rachni decision... just a consequence for making a Renegade choice.  Shepard could've met any number of people due to the choices he made.  Maybe killing Fist could've allowed him to meet someone he was being mean to or something (if word had gotten out that he'd killed him), etc.

Please also keep in mind that the Rachni did not have to show up at all in Mass Effect 2... it's still an advantage.

*throws hands up in air*

Shiala also offers you romance... another plus for not killing her.

Right. I'm done. Go ahead. 

It's oh so obvious paragon gets preferential treatement. Right. Enjoy. 

Just making the point.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 13 juillet 2011 - 10:17 .

[Lumikki]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

How you define difficult decissions?

Example Rachni Queen, which one is more difficult choise kill her or leave her alive?

Clearly killing her is harder. She is asking for mercy, is the last survivor of a sentient species, and poses no immediate threat to you.

So, you value of difficult decission is based threat level?

How about morality level as you can become what you are fighting agaist?
You really think paragon player let Rachni Queen live just because feel sorry for her as been last of her kind?
Are you really that naive to think that paragon path is so simple?

Modifié par Lumikki, 13 juillet 2011 - 10:48 .

[Mathy16]

You do not know wich decisions have bad or good outcomes, it can go either side with each decision.
For example: Saving the Council could have a good consequence = easier support from council race and a bad one = Less human ships because of great losses while saving the council...

Bioware will not make every paragon decision have a good/winning outcome, there will be renegade choices that will have good/winning outcomes.

[Weltea]

[quote]Lumikki wrote...

[quote]Saphra Deden wrote...

[quote]Lumikki wrote...

How you define difficult decissions?

Example Rachni Queen, which one is more difficult choise kill her or leave her alive?

[/quote]

Clearly killing her is harder. She is asking for mercy, is the last survivor of a sentient species, and poses no immediate threat to you.[/quote]
So, you value of difficult decission is based threat level?

How about morality level as you can become what you are fighting agaist?
You really think paragon player let Rachni Queen live just because feel sorry for her as been last of her kind?
Are you really that naive to think that paragon path is so simple?

[/quote
]
Killing her is wrong because it means that her whole race is lost,but saving her means taking a huge risk. So why shouldn't compassion influence your decision?
Also,the fact that she begs for mercy DOES make it harder to kill her (especially since it comes from the mouth of someone nearly-human looking) because that means you actually see her as a sentient being and relate to her more...
As for the whole "paragon players leaving the queen alive simply because they feel sorry her,and the simplification of the paragon path": yes,for some it's that simple and for some it's not.
That's the nice thing about roleplaying,you can make up your own reasons for your characters behaviour!

[Ahriman]

I don't understand point of this thread. None of Renegade decisions resulted for a bad, same as Paragon. None of Renegade decisions resulted for a good, same as Paragon. All these 'consequences' are 30 sec encounters.

Modifié par Wizz, 13 juillet 2011 - 06:31 .

[Laminator]

I'll just drop this here, a list I made after some thought. It shows the pros of going both renegade and paragon.

Saving the Rachni means an extra ally against the Reapers, but we know there will be Rachni husks and relations could be tense post-Reaper threat.

Saving Wrex is clearly the best option, but it's both paragon and renegade, so yeah.

Saving the council means that the Turians, Asari and Salarians all love you, but a human council may mean that Shepard has more leeway to act in ME3, especially since Earth seems to be the primary place under attack.

Killing Balak or saving the hostages is, I think, largely a decision that was supposed to be made based on personal values, and since it is a DLC I don't think it will be a story-changing choice.

Rewriting the Geth heretics will mean that the true Geth have an extra stronghold to support Shepard with (and based on the E3 demo I think it's safe to say that Legion will be an ally), but destroying the base may earn the trust of other species and erase the risk of the virus failing.

Saving the genophage... I don't really see how destroying it would help. Maybe if Wrex isn't alive, the Krogan will grow out of control again and lead to Galactic instability? Or maybe it's a matter of choosing the survival of the Rachni versus the Krogan, and having both alive and strong would have negative repercussions.

Telling the Quarians to seek peace with the Geth or to retake their homeworld is another one that I'm not sure about. Perhaps what you choose here will correspond with what you choose to do with the Heretics somehow. (They're only convinced to make peace if all the Heretics have been destroyed or something?)

Collector Base could easily go either way. Either Cerberus uses it against you or it indoctrinates people, or Cerberus isn't really against you or you take it after defeating Cerberus. I think this choice will have a large role in determining humanity's strength in post-Reaper threat.

Project Overlord's choice seems a little redundant, with the true nature of the Geth revealed. Then again, it is DLC and may serve little purpose overall.

All other choices, I think, will not have many effects on ME3. Maybe Sidonis may come back to help Garrus and take a bullet for him or something, maybe Aresh will try to kill Jack, Kolyat will find a cure for Thane's Kepral Syndrome (that's stretching it a bit though, I think), etc. Nothing big.

Modifié par Laminator, 13 juillet 2011 - 06:35 .

[Ryzaki]

Wizz wrote...

I don't understand point of this thread. None of Renegade decisions resulted for a bad, same as Paragon. None of Renegade decisions resulted for a good, same as Paragon. All these 'consequences' are 30 sec encounters.

Nah it's obvious consequences because they've played ME3 and know that the Paragons = Best Outcome. And the renegades are being punished by not being patted on the back. (Funny considering that renegades are all about not caring about being patted on the back and just trying to get the job done.) 

And the Reapers...if they would just *wait* (which is silly. They've waited 50K years and all of a sudden they're in a rush?) they could defeat humans easily. Sovereign just had to wait for Vigil's data file to weaken before he assumed direct control and invited the other Reapers in. Harbinger just had to wait until the Council and Shepard were old/dead and he could've rolled in with little trouble. 

It's there OMG NOW attitude that keeps screwing them over. 

...Which makes them slightly unbelieveable. I'm supposed to think mecha chutlu's who have been patient for the last 50K years can't wait a few minutes to overpower a data file? It's not like the alliance fleet could hurt him (Sovereign) and the DA was busy. 

Modifié par Ryzaki, 13 juillet 2011 - 06:53 .

[wyk4wgary]

paragon= not mission-oriented, considerate, killing is the last option, prefer peaceful solution
renegade= mission-oriented, cold-hearted, killing first, violence

in real situation, paragon is more time consuming, gain less, but create good impression as u persuade others even gunfight is imminent.
Renegade is time efficient and sometimes gain or loot more regardless how others see u and most of all, the mission excites yourself as u just killed anyone who point a gun on u or is on enemies' side.
Both will get the job done, but in different way.

[littlezack]

Laminator wrote...


Saving the genophage... I don't really see how destroying it would help. Maybe if Wrex isn't alive, the Krogan will grow out of control again and lead to Galactic instability? Or maybe it's a matter of choosing the survival of the Rachni versus the Krogan, and having both alive and strong would have negative repercussions.

The problem with curing the genophage is that, if done, the Krogan's WILL become a population problem again. It might not be a big deal immediately, but in 100 or so years, when they run out of room on their own planets...

[Wynne]

I made a character that I think of as being smart. Good-hearted, willing to do what is necessary to help people, but not willing to be taken for a ride. Very much a case-by-case basis type of person. And I made another Shepard who was very aggressive, but with specific criteria for softening her attitude. And still another Shepard whom I regarded as sort of a boy scout; kind, heroic, but sometimes a little too willing to give people a second chance. I gave them backgrounds and I played them as I saw them.

I think a lot of us made grey characters. Paragade, Renegon, something like those. Shepards that we believe saw the bigger picture, that made the optimal choices. The ones that didn't, we're not going to be surprised when they don't survive or simply get screwed over. The ones that did, we're hoping will be admired for their bright decisions.

I don't want Paragon to mean "everything turns out bright and shiny because you made the standard heroic choices and always pointed your cursor up." I only want Mass Effect 3 to convince me that whatever outcome happens, makes sense. The rachni as allies is a good thing, the rachni as husks is a bad thing, if you killed the queen then neither appear; this is perfect in my book because both sides of the equation make sense.

That's all I care about. That the outcomes make sense. Not whether they're positive or negative. But I do hope that some decisions have truly massive impacts, such as allowing TIM to keep the Collector base, in light of what we know.

[Ryzaki]

Wynne wrote...

I made a character that I think of as being smart. Good-hearted, willing to do what is necessary to help people, but not willing to be taken for a ride. Very much a case-by-case basis type of person. And I made another Shepard who was very aggressive, but with specific criteria for softening her attitude. And still another Shepard whom I regarded as sort of a boy scout; kind, heroic, but sometimes a little too willing to give people a second chance. I gave them backgrounds and I played them as I saw them.

I think a lot of us made grey characters. Paragade, Renegon, something like those. Shepards that we believe saw the bigger picture, that made the optimal choices. The ones that didn't, we're not going to be surprised when they don't survive or simply get screwed over. The ones that did, we're hoping will be admired for their bright decisions.

I don't want Paragon to mean "everything turns out bright and shiny because you made the standard heroic choices and always pointed your cursor up." I only want Mass Effect 3 to convince me that whatever outcome happens, makes sense. The rachni as allies is a good thing, the rachni as husks is a bad thing, if you killed the queen then neither appear; this is perfect in my book because both sides of the equation make sense.

That's all I care about. That the outcomes make sense. Not whether they're positive or negative. But I do hope that some decisions have truly massive impacts, such as allowing TIM to keep the Collector base, in light of what we know.

I love your posts and this one is especially awesome.  

[Mr. Gogeta34]

The whole point of this is to push for not having favoritism in Mass Effect 3... where the game's narrative wraps (sometimes unrealistically) around the Paragon decisions.

The base for this arguement stems from Mass Effect 1 and 2.  Making light of this fact does not make it any less the truth.

The Rachni husks seem to be present regardless of the decision you make... currently, it seems as though the Rachni queen may provide a counter rachni... rachni offensive.

Some of the Paragon/Renegade choice results didn't make sense... while all of them tended to favor the Paragon choice over the other options.

If that changes in Mass Effect 3, awesome... that's the point of this thread.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 13 juillet 2011 - 10:28 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Wynne wrote...
I don't want Paragon to mean "everything turns out bright and shiny because you made the standard heroic choices and always pointed your cursor up."

I agree with you... that's why this thread exists.  I don't want to make a Paragon choice knowing ahead of time that the game won't deliver an outcome better than this... every time the option to hit the blue button is available.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 13 juillet 2011 - 10:33 .

[darkside927]

MAJOR KotOR SPOILER:

I liked how in KotOR 1 that no matter which path you chose, you ended up winning in some way. If you chose the Jedi (good) path, you redeemed yourself as Revan. If you chose the Sith (evil) path, you started to rebuild the Sith Empire as Darth Revan. Either way you defeated Darth Malak and saved the galaxy.

[darkside927]

MAJOR KotOR SPOILER:

I liked how in KotOR 1 that no matter which path you chose, you ended up winning in some way. If you chose the Jedi (good) path, you redeemed yourself as Revan. If you chose the Sith (evil) path, you started to rebuild the Sith Empire as Darth Revan. Either way you defeated Darth Malak and saved the galaxy.

[ubermensch007]

Saphra Deden wrote...Spectres are mortal and fallable just like everyone else.

ubermensch007: They are also the best there is at what they do.Unlike everyone else.

Ryzaki wrote...
I'm a paragade actually hun. But thanks for letting me know you're a troll. 

Saphra: A paragade is just a paragon with a bad attitude. They act rough but they
don't have the stomach to make any real renegade choices.

They're also a dime a dozen these days.

ubermensch007: Well I consider myself a Paragade as well and I don't interept myself that way.In fact I see myself as one who seeks to find a balance betwixt "Never say never" (every option is on the table) and "Having a code of conduct which is second to none." That's what it means to be a Paragade to me.

Valentia X wrote...]/b]


One might argue that the individual is just as important as the millions.

Deden: Anyone who did would be a fool.

ubermensch007 interjects...What is it that somehow intrinsicaly gives more value to the lives of millions over one? I remeber a seen from Speed, in which one guy says something like,"I can't die here.I have a family to feed (or he says a wife). And another guy replies, "So what.Because I'm single, that means your life is more im portant that mine?! The first guy responds,"That's not what I'm saying - (the other guy) "Yeah, that's what it sounds like your saying to me!"

Valentia X wrote...Why? That the millions should always override the individual is how
dictatorships are justified and why some places stomp down on basic
civil rights. I'm not trying to posit it as an either/or situation, but
there may be times where the rights of the few take precendent over the
comfort of many.

Saphra wrote... We aren't talking about a mere form of government here. This debate is about the survival of millions of individuals (remember those millions are individuals too) and even the survival of an entire
species, which is something much greater than a mere person.

Whatever you might think anyway even the most liberal societies ultimately sacrifice the individual for the greater whole.

Saphra Deden wrote... "David's suffering is worth it."

Alright now Saphra, I have a question for you.You seem to support this "Whatever it takes" platform. Would you please check out this awesome moment from Brandon Lee and Powers Booth in Rapid Fire. 4:30 - 5:58 www.youtube.com/watch

To quote Jake,"Whatever it takes? I'm so sick and tired of that bullsh-t! Whatever it takes - Is something that happens to someone else..."

I'm just curious Deden, would you volunteer yourself to suffer as David suffered for the "good of the species" ? <_<

You say that the "survival of a species is more important than that of a mere person". Err... Have you ever heard about a fellow by the name of Kal-el/Clark Kent/Superman? You know, The Last Son of Krypton.Isn't about next to every other kryptonian that he encounters with powers such as his, end up abusing their power?

The argument you make is strong.But sometimes that ol saying is true,"Your one of the good ones." Which implies that, most aren't that good or worth having in your company.Now I believe you asked about the N7: Javelin Missile Launched - Mission.My Shepard is colonial... And he wasn't about to let the Batarians win.An off-world colony is a 'life insurance policy' for every species who has one.There was no way that I was going to save the colonist at the expense of the colony.But I don't see that as a Renegade Decision.I see it as a "trade off".

A trade-off (or tradeoff) is a situation that involves losing one quality or aspect of something in return for gaining another quality or aspect. It implies a decision to be made with full comprehension of both the upside and downside of a particular choice.

Finally...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Yeah, I'm being petty for demanding proper intelligence on an alien ship I'm about to attack or potential allies.

Saphra Deden wrote...You were given all the intel you needed to complete the mission. What more do you want?

What, you wanted to know the true purpose behind the mission? Well, sorry, you are just a grunt.

Uhh...

T.I.M. Humans may control the Council, but Shepard remains our "best" hope.

Miranda: The Council will never trust Cerberus.They'll never accept our help! Even after everything humanity has accomplished - but Shepard, they will follow him.He's a hero.A bloody icon! But he's just [b]"one" man.If we lose Shepard, humanity might well follow..."

The Illusive Man: Then see to it, that we don't lose him..."

Hmm... That doesn't sound like there talking about some "grunt" to me...

Modifié par ubermensch007, 15 juillet 2011 - 08:38 .

[F00lishG]

If you're going to be an out and out Renegade, you have to accept you won't get the best parts of the story. Being Ruthless is supposed to be its own reward.

[Lumikki]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

You really think paragon player let Rachni Queen live just because feel sorry for her as been last of her kind?
Are you really that naive to think that paragon path is so simple?

The Paragon Path is that simple. I know this for a fact because I've talked to a lot of Paragons in my time.

First sign for ignorance is trying to put personal opinions as fact.

It's not that simple. What you see is,  looking renegede eyes the paragon situation.

I could say that renegade path is most simple one, just kill all, then all possible treat has been eliminated. Is it that simple? No it isn't, same way paragon choises are not that simple. It's pure biased ignorance think other ways.

Weltea wrote...

Killing her is wrong because it means that her whole race is lost,but saving her means taking a huge risk. So why shouldn't compassion influence your decision?
Also,the fact that she begs for mercy DOES make it harder to kill her (especially since it comes from the mouth of someone nearly-human looking) because that means you actually see her as a sentient being and relate to her more...
As for the whole "paragon players leaving the queen alive simply because they feel sorry her,and the simplification of the paragon path": yes,for some it's that simple and for some it's not.
That's the nice thing about roleplaying,you can make up your own reasons for your characters behaviour!

Yeah, it's nice to able to make decission based how player wants (role-playing).
Letting her to live is risk, but not any bigger risk than killing her. Meaning do they gonna help with war or be agaist. It's assumption what can go both ways, so it's also risk what can go both ways. Depending what you think will happen.

When I saved Rachni Queen, it was based 3 things.

1. Rachni queen it self has not made any crime at all.
2. Rachni queen is last of her race, so killing her would be genocide.
3. As paragon I fight agaist repears because they think they are superior race and doesn't allow other races to exist, because they can become treat. So, how I'm any better if I kill Rachni queen based just possible treat in future. My filosophy as paragon is to protect all races and that includes Rachni race too.

Which side Rachni race will be, has no decission meaning, because player can't know the answer for that.

Modifié par Lumikki, 15 juillet 2011 - 09:10 .

[Dave of Canada]

F00lishG wrote...

If you're going to be an out and out Renegade, you have to accept you won't get the best parts of the story. Being Ruthless is supposed to be its own reward.

Let's screw over Paragons then and say being nice is it's own reward.

[TobyHasEyes]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

You really think paragon player let Rachni Queen live just because feel sorry for her as been last of her kind?
Are you really that naive to think that paragon path is so simple?

The Paragon Path is that simple. I know this for a fact because I've talked to a lot of Paragons in my time.

 More times than not, I haven't taken the Paragon path of saving the Rachni Queen, but there are better arguments than a general distaste for killing for the Paragon path

 - We have no evidence that she herself has done anything, so to kill her for the actions of others would be wrong
 - She is the last of her species; not that that merits sympathy, but out of a preservation of species' principle it makes her valuable (I don't agree with this argument, but it isn't a 'simple' argument)
 - We may trust her assurances that she will live peacefully, and a desire to promote that general principle means that we should preserve and encourage it where we find it

 Again, this doesn't need a huge post explaining why you think those are invalid views, the point is that they are not simplistic or impulsive or naive. They may be wrong, but thats doesn't make them any of those things