1768 réponses à ce sujet

[ubermensch007]

Lumikki wrote... Evil in this game are the enemy, reapers. (even they aren't really evil)

Huh?!

You....... Don't...... Consider...... The Reapers to be evil?

They impose there will -- corrupt the minds of sentient life forms. Indoctrination its called or Mind Rape!

They inslave people. (Protheans/Collectors) Alter there physiology without thier consent.(Paul Grayson/Reaperized -- Mass Effect: Retribution) (Husk)  -- An act which could be adressed as Genetic Rape!

Finally they systematically extinguish all culture, technology and organic sentience from the galaxy.

If that is not 'EVIL' than what the hell is? If the way the Reapers choose to interact with other life forms does not make them evil, than what are they; in your veiw?

For that matter do you have a concept of 'Good & Evil or are do you practice moral relativism?

Modifié par ubermensch007, 16 juillet 2011 - 08:10 .

[Ryzaki]

Thus why I was trying to get the geth off their ass. But we're not going to come to an agreement. Suffice to say my Shepard saw that as a tactical decision.

And by god some renegade lines are borderline psychopathic. "hell of a vacation." ugh. Go burn in a fire renegade Shep.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

You know he could've always been sarcastic with that = P

[Lumikki]

ubermensch007 wrote...

Lumikki wrote... Evil in this game are the enemy, reapers. (even they aren't really evil)

Huh?!

You....... Don't...... Consider...... The Reapers to be evil?

They impose there will -- corrupt the minds of sentient life forms. Indoctrination its called or Mind Rape!

They inslave people. (Protheans/Collectors) Alter there physiology without thier consent.(Paul Grayson/Reaperized -- Mass Effect: Retribution) (Husk)  -- An act which could be adressed as Genetic Rape!

Finally they systematically extinguish all culture, technology and organic sentience from the galaxy.

If that is not 'EVIL' than what the hell is? If the way the Reapers choose to interact with other life forms does not make them evil, than what are they; in your veiw?

For that matter do you have a concept of 'Good & Evil or are do you practice moral relativism?

Reapers act like evil, because they destroy other races, but that's only because they have different philosophy in how life should be. Reapers consider them self as superior lifeform. We fight agaist them because we want to survive and we think they path of life is wrong.

I consider anyone evil when they enjoy bringing pain to others. Reapers doesn't enjoy from actions to others, they just see it more like neccassary. Evil for me is little kid pulling wings from fly because it's fun, because he likes the pain it cause the fly. You understand what I mean? Different between "neccassary" and enjoyment.

Modifié par Lumikki, 16 juillet 2011 - 09:05 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

The Reapers are Evil... no matter how misguided they may be.

[Seboist]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Honestly I will admit this is a weakness of Mass Effect 2. TIM apparently thinks Shepard was worth spending millions of credits on just to have him fill the role of a common soldier. (even though he says otherwise) The plot is just poorly thought-out and Shepard isn't ever important to it.

I believe the hidden reason was due to TIM knowing that the Collectors/Reapers were after Shepard (altough he didn't know why) and wanted to bring him back as live bait to lure them out. He wouldn't have been able to pull off the Horizon mission without him.

[Praetor Knight]

Saphra Deden wrote...

He didn't need Shepard for Horizon, he just needed the VS. Shepard wasn't needed for anything.

I just wonder what is known about the Cypher.

[Seboist]

Saphra Deden wrote...

He didn't need Shepard for Horizon, he just needed the VS. Shepard wasn't needed for anything.

But wasn't the VS lured out there due to TIM leaking info about Shepard's reapparence and working with Cerberus?

[ubermensch007]

Lumikki wrote...

ubermensch007 wrote...

Lumikki wrote... Evil in this game are the enemy, reapers. (even they aren't really evil)

Huh?!

You....... Don't...... Consider...... The Reapers to be evil?

They impose there will -- corrupt the minds of sentient life forms. Indoctrination its called or Mind Rape!

They inslave people. (Protheans/Collectors) Alter there physiology without thier consent.(Paul Grayson/Reaperized -- Mass Effect: Retribution) (Husk)  -- An act which could be adressed as Genetic Rape!

Finally they systematically extinguish all culture, technology and organic sentience from the galaxy.

If that is not 'EVIL' than what the hell is? If the way the Reapers choose to interact with other life forms does not make them evil, than what are they; in your veiw?

For that matter do you have a concept of 'Good & Evil or are do you practice moral relativism?

Reapers act like evil, because they destroy other races, but that's only because they have different philosophy in how life should be. Reapers consider them self as superior lifeform. We fight agaist them because we want to survive and we think they path of life is wrong.

I consider anyone evil when they enjoy bringing pain to others. Reapers doesn't enjoy from actions to others, they just see it more like neccassary. Evil for me is little kid pulling wings from fly because it's fun, because he likes the pain it cause the fly. You understand what I mean? Different between "neccassary" and enjoyment.

Sadism is one type of evil.But it is not alone.Is more evil committed by those who seek to intentionally harm and mistreat another.Or by those who are just indifferent to the plight and circumstances of others? The Reapers are another kind of evil.They are the,"WHO THE HELL DO YOU THINK YOU ARE?! Kind of Evil.When a person thinks that they can act with "impunity"...

Lumikki, there is NOTHING "neccessary" about what the Reapers do.There are like 10 Doomsday Scenarios that all sentient species have to deal with.For some reason or other, the Reapers have decide to intentionally bring about 'The End of Life' What's up with that?!

ubermensch007 wrote...

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

Saphra Deden wrote... I don't know, what else are they offering? Will they take care of my loved ones for me? What will the process be like? David's adverse reaction to it seems to have been caused by his autism. He appeared to be just fine until they opened the connection.

Regardless, if I said no I'd be selfish. Understandably so, but selfish none the less.

Would you volunteer?

Here is a better question:

SHOULD you volunteer?

The best way for me to answer these questions of yours, is to think back to something that happened during "Day 3 of 24".There are many things that Jack Bauer has done that can be critiqued.The execution of Ryan Chapelle, is one that I HIGHLY disapproved of...When I put myself in Chapelle's place, I came to a decision not all that different from Iphigenia.




What I decided was - What I realized is this...

I have the chance to help alot of people.:happy: Should I just help myself instead?

So I probably would sacrifice myself for others...

Modifié par ubermensch007, 20 juillet 2011 - 05:50 .

[Lumikki]

ubermensch007 wrote...

Lumikki, there is NOTHING "neccessary" about what the Reapers do.There are like 10 Doomsday Scenarios that all sentient species have to deal with.For some reason or other, the Reapers have decide to intentionally bring about 'The End of Life' What's up with that?!

It depense who's view point you are looking for?

The end of life of others, but not to they style of life. Like we try to protect our way of life and kill reapers. Human in real life has killed many animals to extinct and we kill many animals every day in our life. Neccassary to our life, sure some of it, but who sayed killing us aren't neccassary for reapers life. Remember they ships are build from biological material and they are they ships. I'm not arguing doesn't they action look like evil, because it does, I'm just saying it all depense a lot of who's view point you look.

[Ziggy]

Lumikki wrote...

ubermensch007 wrote...

Lumikki, there is NOTHING "neccessary" about what the Reapers do.There are like 10 Doomsday Scenarios that all sentient species have to deal with.For some reason or other, the Reapers have decide to intentionally bring about 'The End of Life' What's up with that?!

It depense who's view point you are looking for?

The end of life of others, but not to they style of life. Like we try to protect our way of life and kill reapers. Human in real life has killed many animals to extinct and we kill many animals every day in our life. Neccassary to our life, sure some of it, but who sayed killing us aren't neccassary for reapers life. Remember they ships are build from biological material and they are they ships. I'm not arguing doesn't they action look like evil, because it does, I'm just saying it all depense a lot of who's view point you look.

A valid point. I'd go further though and say that in that analogy we're probably more like ants to them than animals.

[ubermensch007]

StrawberryViking wrote...

 EDIT: Title change- Apparently I was unclear when I made the title of the first, so hopefully you won't get more "But everyone will win in some form, so it's a moot point."

(To me at leaSt) I've always felt that paragon was always the safest route to go, and it is to my understanding that most people believe that overall paragon choices usually fare better in the long run. 

But in ME3, I want the tagline for ME1 (Extinction is one descision away) to be true. I want it so that victory isn't assured simply because you pick the option in the upper corner. Renegade has simply been degraded to the image of "ruthless douchebag"  whose actions seem trivial and needless in the scope of the entire game because for the most part renegade usually equates to less content (with the killing of characters) and in this aspect it feels like the renegade is being punished. I also in the belief that renegade seems this way because the benefits of their actions never really come to fruition like paragon's do, and in fact in that sense it seems needless. The Rachni for example, you kill the rachni queen as a rengade 'just to be safe', which I believe with the information you are given is a perfectly valid reason. However, if as a paragon you let her live, you are forced to realize that killing her as a renegade was all for naught.

The only renegade decision that I find that was truly "victory" for renegades was on Samara's recruitment with Elnora. You are specifically told before you start that every eclipse sister has to earn her uniform by killing. When you encounter her, Renegades, while not immediatly shooting her upon seeing her uniform, does kill her after a presumed act of hostility. The paragon lets her go, and finds out afterwards she was infact a ruthless killer and murdered the volus. 

Just once I want a paragon decision to bite us in the ass. It's all I ask. War (or perhaps genocide) is mean business and I want

I know the usual convention is paragon=good, renegade=bad, but I do believe that you can't be a saint all the time and expect to end up on top. The saying goes "Nice guys finish last.", while not completely true, you can't win trying to appease everybody. 

Paragon Vs. Renegade: Who does BioWare Favor? When I look at how BW treats P & R I don't see favortism - What I see is BioWare being of the opinion that that old saying is true (for the most part) "The greater the risk, the greater the reward."

The Paragon by defintion (at least in Mass Effect Universe) Is the "RISK-TAKER Par Excellence... So of course they are going to recieve a GREATER PAY-OFF. :whistle:What the hell do you expect?! I was thinking the other day about the different ways one could go about completing the Virmire Mission.Now I as a Paragon player did all in my power to help Kirrahe and his team every chance I got.And I'm hoping that BioWare doesn't forget all the effort we put into helping them out and when we in Mass Effect 3, finally visit the Salarian homeworld:  Sur'Kesh.We damn well better (GODDAMMIT) get more of a warm reception and so forth; than those who treated the STG on Virmire as though they were 'expendable' !!

The Renegade by definition -- You know its funny, people say they think of this they think of that, when they think of a renegade.Personally, when I hear the word 'Renegade' I think of Lorenzo Lamas from his show (by that name) that I use to watch in the nineties.

But as I was saying.If the paragon is a 'Risk-Taker' than the renegade is 'RISK-ADVERSE' to the extreme!  Don't try to deny it.You know its true. I have read far to many post here from renegade players to be persuaded otherwise.If you did a keyword search of the word "risk" a 1,000 times 10,000 post would come up attributable to renegade players talking about how they didn't do this or that b/c "It was to big of a "risk" to take."

Modifié par ubermensch007, 22 juillet 2011 - 04:53 .

[Stofsk]

Given what we know about indoctrination from ME2, and hell even ME1, I can't shake the feeling that letting Rana Thanoptis and that Salarian dude in the cells on Virmire go (paragon options) won't come back to haunt us. At the end when you're talking to Vigil he mentions how the reapers used indoctrinated spies to ferret out prothean hold-out worlds. Both Rana and the Salarian might well be in the terminal stages of indoctrination, in which case letting them go could be disastrous. However at that stage in the game you don't know much about indoctrination, other than what you heard from Shiala on Feros and what you witnessed had become of Benezia on Noveria. You don't know, for example, Vigil's intel, or what happened to the Cerberus team who went on the derelict reaper. (even dead, reaper indoctrination can affect people)

That's a couple renegade decisions I can think of which can (potentially) help rather than hinder you, and are small enough that most people may not even immediately think of them. Not like say, the rachni queen which is a huge decision that's guaranteed to have consequences.

[ubermensch007]

I've been thinking recently about how in one major way a renegade descision may pay off more than the Paragon choice...

When I consider all that happens, Post Battle of the Citadel, with the "Let the Council die" version.I'm starting to think that not only humanity may be stronger when the Reapers arrive, but the Turian Heirarchy and others as well.For as we learn from the Galactic News Report: After the destruction of the Destiny Ascension and desimation of the Citadel fleet.The turians no longer honor the Treaty of Fairaxen.They are now producing as many dreadnought class starships as they damn well please... Which may be for the best...

The Fifth Fleet is stronger than they are in the alternative future.Where they lost eight of thier most powerful warships.In the Paragon Reality.While humanity has the good will and respect of alot of races.The new Council has become somewhat complacent.The Destiny Ascension is going on a 20 Colony Victory cruise.The Alliance is trying to play ball with everyone.It seems as though all of Citadel space is under the illusion that everything is peaceful and secure.Prosperity abounds... But in actuality... War is on the horizon, and few see it coming...

Modifié par ubermensch007, 22 novembre 2011 - 08:05 .

[seirhart]

ubermensch007 wrote...

StrawberryViking wrote...

 EDIT: Title change- Apparently I was unclear when I made the title of the first, so hopefully you won't get more "But everyone will win in some form, so it's a moot point."

(To me at leaSt) I've always felt that paragon was always the safest route to go, and it is to my understanding that most people believe that overall paragon choices usually fare better in the long run. 

But in ME3, I want the tagline for ME1 (Extinction is one descision away) to be true. I want it so that victory isn't assured simply because you pick the option in the upper corner. Renegade has simply been degraded to the image of "ruthless douchebag"  whose actions seem trivial and needless in the scope of the entire game because for the most part renegade usually equates to less content (with the killing of characters) and in this aspect it feels like the renegade is being punished. I also in the belief that renegade seems this way because the benefits of their actions never really come to fruition like paragon's do, and in fact in that sense it seems needless. The Rachni for example, you kill the rachni queen as a rengade 'just to be safe', which I believe with the information you are given is a perfectly valid reason. However, if as a paragon you let her live, you are forced to realize that killing her as a renegade was all for naught.

The only renegade decision that I find that was truly "victory" for renegades was on Samara's recruitment with Elnora. You are specifically told before you start that every eclipse sister has to earn her uniform by killing. When you encounter her, Renegades, while not immediatly shooting her upon seeing her uniform, does kill her after a presumed act of hostility. The paragon lets her go, and finds out afterwards she was infact a ruthless killer and murdered the volus. 

Just once I want a paragon decision to bite us in the ass. It's all I ask. War (or perhaps genocide) is mean business and I want

I know the usual convention is paragon=good, renegade=bad, but I do believe that you can't be a saint all the time and expect to end up on top. The saying goes "Nice guys finish last.", while not completely true, you can't win trying to appease everybody. 

Paragon Vs. Renegade: Who does BioWare Favor? When I look at how BW treats P & R I don't see favortism - What I see is BioWare being of the opinion that that old saying is true (for the most part) "The greater the risk, the greater the reward."

The Paragon by defintion (at least in Mass Effect Universe) Is the "RISK-TAKER Par Excellence... So of course they are going to recieve a GREATER PAY-OFF. :whistle:What the hell do you expect?! I was thinking the other day about the different ways one could go about completing the Virmire Mission.Now I as a Paragon player did all in my power to help Kirrahe and his team every chance I got.And I'm hoping that BioWare doesn't forget all the effort we put into helping them out and when we in Mass Effect 3, finally visit the Salarian homeworld:  Sur'Kesh.We damn well better (GODDAMMIT) get more of a warm reception and so forth; than those who treated the STG on Virmire as though they were 'expendable' !!

The Renegade by definition -- You know its funny, people say they think of this they think of that, when they think of a renegade.Personally, when I hear the word 'Renegade' I think of Lorenzo Lamas from his show (by that name) that I use to watch in the nineties.

But as I was saying.If the paragon is a 'Risk-Taker' than the renegade is 'RISK-ADVERSE' to the extreme!  Don't try to deny it.You know its true. I have read far to many post here from renegade players to be persuaded otherwise.If you did a keyword search of the word "risk" a 1,000 times 10,000 post would come up attributable to renegade players talking about how they didn't do this or that b/c "It was to big of a "risk" to take."

I agree with this, I may be a fan of going pure paragon in all of my decisions, but at the same time my shepards see all of his paragon choices as taking a risk no matter how big or small it is. I also want some or all of the paragon choices to come back and haunght shepard for those choices.

[PnXMarcin1PL]

Saphra Deden wrote...

If after the leak you don't see Bioware's blatant Paragon favoritism then you are blind.

That'd be nice if geth heretics after being rewritten made true geth also woship reapers. That'd be pain in the ass 

[phimseto]

StrawberryViking wrote...

 EDIT: Title change- Apparently I was unclear when I made the title of the first, so hopefully you won't get more "But everyone will win in some form, so it's a moot point."

(To me at leaSt) I've always felt that paragon was always the safest route to go, and it is to my understanding that most people believe that overall paragon choices usually fare better in the long run. 

But in ME3, I want the tagline for ME1 (Extinction is one descision away) to be true. I want it so that victory isn't assured simply because you pick the option in the upper corner. Renegade has simply been degraded to the image of "ruthless douchebag"  whose actions seem trivial and needless in the scope of the entire game because for the most part renegade usually equates to less content (with the killing of characters) and in this aspect it feels like the renegade is being punished. I also in the belief that renegade seems this way because the benefits of their actions never really come to fruition like paragon's do, and in fact in that sense it seems needless. The Rachni for example, you kill the rachni queen as a rengade 'just to be safe', which I believe with the information you are given is a perfectly valid reason. However, if as a paragon you let her live, you are forced to realize that killing her as a renegade was all for naught.

The only renegade decision that I find that was truly "victory" for renegades was on Samara's recruitment with Elnora. You are specifically told before you start that every eclipse sister has to earn her uniform by killing. When you encounter her, Renegades, while not immediatly shooting her upon seeing her uniform, does kill her after a presumed act of hostility. The paragon lets her go, and finds out afterwards she was infact a ruthless killer and murdered the volus. 

Just once I want a paragon decision to bite us in the ass. It's all I ask. War (or perhaps genocide) is mean business and I want

I know the usual convention is paragon=good, renegade=bad, but I do believe that you can't be a saint all the time and expect to end up on top. The saying goes "Nice guys finish last.", while not completely true, you can't win trying to appease everybody. 

Just wanted to post a big "Amen."

[Raven879]

I played ME1 and ME2 with two playthroughs. A primarily paragon and primarily renegade career. Each one I was able to beat the game with perfect outcomes on all ends. There is a difference between being renegade and making Wrex stand down and being a doodoo and shooting him in the face.

I kept specter status in me2 without the council because I choose Anderson as councilor rather than Udina, cause choosing Udina is more of a doodoo choice than renegade. I'm sure in ME3 I will "win" in both playthroughs even though I choose renegade as long as I avoid the doodoo choices just because they are in the bottom right dialouge wheel spot. Not to mention the fact Bioware will have to implement legitimate consequences for choices aside from emails and 30 second cutscenes. : /

[Drone223]

Arcian wrote...

PnXMarcin1PL wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

If after the leak you don't see Bioware's blatant Paragon favoritism then you are blind.

That'd be nice if geth heretics after being rewritten made true geth also woship reapers. That'd be pain in the ass 

That choice does backfire *spoiler*  *spoiler* And I'm totally cool with that. I would still rewrite every time.

You must remember that is from a draft so that could change