708 réponses à ce sujet

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

lolnoobs wrote...

A non sissy would have shot him.

Sometimes not pulling the trigger is the braver move.

[Golden Owl]

Seboist wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

Because the renegade conception of "pro-human" means oppression of all non-humans.

Paragon fabrication right there.

I have always wondered about that one....I don't play renegade (tried it a couple of times, but couldn't get all the way through the games)...so don't know enough about renegade. What I have seen of renegade though hasn't actually struck me as necessarily pro human-anti alien....Question is, is Renegade pro-human-anti alien or not?...Semantics?

Modifié par Golden Owl, 17 août 2011 - 12:45 .

[LilyasAvalon]

lolnoobs wrote...

LilyasAvalon wrote...

The concept of paragon/renegade does not work if you take both to extremes, the game IS supposed to be about our own morals and shaped by our choices and decisions. It's supposed to technically be played paragade after all.

I've personally viewed renegade as doing what is deemed necessary with possibly being a bit of a hardened ****, while paragon is seeking the alternative route and being compassionate.

I don't approve of paragons being called sissy's though. What about in Overlord, when Paragon interupt let us pistol whip the scientist?

Pistol whip? WOW, HOW TOTALLY BADASS CONSIDERING HE WAS POINTING A GUN AT YOU.

A non sissy would have shot him.

Really? There's no satisifaction in that quick shot though. Pistol whip probably broke his nose.

I like making them suffer.

[Keatons]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

LilyasAvalon wrote....

I don't approve of paragons being called sissy's though. What about in Overlord, when Paragon interupt let us pistol whip the scientist?

Or telling the elcor on Omega you would break his legs?

Or punching Thane's son in the face?

[Seboist]

Luc0s wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Agamo45 wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

Because pro-human is selfish and renegade is selfish.

It's not complicated.

What's selfish about wanting to keep humanity strong and independant?

There is nothing selfish about wanting to keep humanity strong and independent. But wanting to keep humanity strong and independent over the backs of other alien species is completely selfish, which is what Cerberus and renegade-Shepard stands for.

Renegade-Shep isn't simply about being pro-human, it's about being pro-human at all cost, even when that means other alien species will have to suffer for it.

Paragon-Shep is more like a socialist, wanting to keep everyone and everything equal. Para-Shep is all about everyone getting their fair share, if you get what I mean.


However, having played both Paragon and Renegade, I can also safely say that Renegade wants to be independent (which is why pro-human = renegade) while Parafon tries to build an alliance between humanity and the other species.

Utterly false, all the renegade major decisions benefit all of the galaxy. Like I've said, killing the Rachni Queen,sacrificing the council, destroying the heretic geth,etc benefit all species and not just humanity.

And how the hell is a decision like wiping out the feros colony 'being pro-human at all cost at the expense of others" ?

Okay, lets put it more clearly than. Renegade is not pro-human, but pro-human is renegade. This might sound the same to you, but it's a big difference.


Also, my statement that renegade is pro-human at the cost of other alien species is totally true.


See how you twist the facts. This is how it really is:

- Killing the rachni-queen: Commiting genocide on a species that did nothing wrong to you, just because you're afraid they might turn on you later (this totally proves my statement that renegade-Shep tries to ensure his dominance at the cost of other species).

- Sacrificing the council: Letting the council die so you can get humanity to lead the new council (keep in mind that "focus on Sovereign" is not renegade, it's neutral. The renegade option was "let the council die!").

- Destroying the Heretic geth: Killing potential allies simply because you mistrust Legion and the orthodox geth (Legion and the orthodox geth are willing to co-operate with you, but renegade-Shep doesn't roll that way, he rolls alone).

- Rachni are a threat to all galactic life and merely taking the word of the Queen who's in no position to bargain is foolish. Oh and by releasing the Queen you're pissing on the graves of the ancestors of all Krogans who died in the millions to stop them previously but since Bioware has their holy paladins covered you won't have to worry about it of course.

- Both the neutral and renegade options are one in the same. The only difference is Shepard having some malice with the latter that doesn't even make any difference afterwords.

- Destroying the heretic geth isn't just about not trusting Legion's geth(which is a great blind leap of faith) but preventing the risk of of the heretics memories/perspective from corrupting them ("traumatizing" in Shepard's words). This should also win favor with the Quarians for renegade Shepard but given Bioware's past track record it isn't likely.

[MrFob]

It is not the case.
I think the pro-nation/culture anecdote works pretty well here. We should have kept it without the politics attached.
Imagine a diplomat for certain country who tries to help his country be forging alliances with other, who understands that mutual cooperation and a balanced economy, not only for his own nation but also for others brings stability and therefore benefits the group he stands for. I'd consider that a very paragon stance.
Now the renegade guy would probably be a general who is concerned with his nations security above all ales. Quick to use military solutions and very eager to secure resources, even on the expense of other nations, he'd still be pro his country but trying to achieve what he believes is best for it by more aggressive means.
Both strategies might work and both near risks, it is just a question of your personal beliefs on how effective they are and how far you are willing to go.
In Shepards case of course, there is the matter of a giant thread to throw in the mix but in general, the choices he makes (most of the time) come down to these two points of view.

[LilyasAvalon]

Also, Geth can't be emotionless. How is Legion is obviously Shepard's fanboy if he's emotionless? xD

[Golden Owl]

LilyasAvalon wrote...

The concept of paragon/renegade does not work if you take both to extremes, the game IS supposed to be about our own morals and shaped by our choices and decisions. It's supposed to technically be played paragade after all.

I've personally viewed renegade as doing what is deemed necessary with possibly being a bit of a hardened ****, while paragon is seeking the alternative route and being compassionate.

I don't approve of paragons being called sissy's though. What about in Overlord, when Paragon interupt let us pistol whip the scientist?

Paragon isn't a sissy....can be naive and holier-than-though at times....but sissy...No....Paragon is most generally as you say:

I've personally viewed renegade as doing what is deemed necessary with
possibly being a bit of a hardened ****, while paragon is seeking the
alternative route and being compassionate.

[Seboist]

Golden Owl wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

Because the renegade conception of "pro-human" means oppression of all non-humans.

Paragon fabrication right there.

I have always wondered about that one....I don't play renegade (tried it a couple of times, but couldn't get all the way through the games)...so don't know enough about renegade. What I have seen of renegade though hasn't actually struck me as necessarily pro human-anti alien....Question is, is Renegade pro-human-anti alien or not?

There are some dialogue options and decisions that lean that way like supporting Terra Firma in the "our own worst enemy" side quest but generally speaking renegade isn't simply "pro-human and anti-alien". The renegade path in Feros in ME1 is the best example showing that renegade isn't all about merely scheming to get humans on top.

[Barquiel]

Golden Owl wrote...

Question is, is Renegade pro-human-anti alien or not?

Renegade Shepard gets an all-human council if you destroy the DA.
Paragon Shepard gets a multi-racial council if you destroy the DA.

-> renegade = anti-alien

Modifié par Barquiel, 17 août 2011 - 12:49 .

[LilyasAvalon]

Golden Owl wrote...

LilyasAvalon wrote...

The concept of paragon/renegade does not work if you take both to extremes, the game IS supposed to be about our own morals and shaped by our choices and decisions. It's supposed to technically be played paragade after all.

I've personally viewed renegade as doing what is deemed necessary with possibly being a bit of a hardened ****, while paragon is seeking the alternative route and being compassionate.

I don't approve of paragons being called sissy's though. What about in Overlord, when Paragon interupt let us pistol whip the scientist?

Paragon isn't a sissy....can be naive and holier-than-though at times....but sissy...No....Paragon is most generally as you say:[b]

Hence why I said the game isn't supposed to played with extremes to with para or rene. The fully paragon Shepard is just as cheesy as fully renegade Shepard in my opinion.

Modifié par LilyasAvalon, 17 août 2011 - 12:49 .

[marshalleck]

Barquiel wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

Question is, is Renegade pro-human-anti alien or not?

Renegade Shepard gets an all-human council if you destroy the DA.
Paragon Shepard gets a multi-racial council if you destroy the DA.

-> renegade = anti-alien

nah

[JPfanner]

In ME2, is there even much of a difference between roleplaying a Shepard with an active Cerberus control chip and a heavy Renegade oriented playthrough?

[Alraiis]

Every difference of opinion that Shepard can express must, by virtue of the mechanics, be split into the Paragon and Renegade categories. Paragon vs. Renegade is not good vs. evil. It's community vs. individual, idealism vs. pragmatism, rehabilitation vs. capital punishment, salad vs. soup, cats vs. dogs, etc., etc., etc. For my money, if you want a nuanced character, pick what makes sense and ignore the labels. Only zealots vote straight down the ticket. (Feel free to roleplay a zealot, though.)

[Golden Owl]

Barquiel wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

Question is, is Renegade pro-human-anti alien or not?

Renegade Shepard gets an all-human council if you destroy the DA.
Paragon Shepard gets a multi-racial council if you destroy the DA.

-> renegade = anti-alien

Does the Renegade Shep actually choose an all human council though? Or is it just what takes place while s/he is dead?

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

marshalleck wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

Question is, is Renegade pro-human-anti alien or not?

Renegade Shepard gets an all-human council if you destroy the DA.
Paragon Shepard gets a multi-racial council if you destroy the DA.

-> renegade = anti-alien

nah

I generally disagree with Marshall,but he brings teh lulz so I will just say this.

The decision to save the council or not was one of the most loaded decisions I have ever seen.

First the DA is the biggest target in council space,why you put all 3 councilors aboard it is beyond me.

Why is focusing on saving the many less heroic then focusing on saving 3 replaceable assclowns and a dreadnaught.

Modifié par Humanoid_Typhoon, 17 août 2011 - 01:01 .

[AnAccountWithNoName]

lolnoobs wrote...

Luc0s wrote...
- Killing the rachni-queen: Commiting genocide on a species that did nothing wrong to you, just because you're afraid they might turn on you later (this totally proves my statement that renagde-Shep tries to ensure his dominance at the cost of other species).

You do know that this insectoid race once almost destroyed any other spacefaring race right?

Luc0s wrote...- Sacrificing the council: Letting the council die so you can get humanity to lead the new council (keep in mind that "focus on Sovereign" is not renegade, it's neutral. The renegade option was "let the council die!").

If they had acted instead of ignoring commisar shep Sovereign wouldn't have reached the citadel saving many lives. It's the council that's renegade, all they do is look after themselves, why not let them die?

Luc0s wrote...- Destroying the Heretic geth: Killing potential allies simply because you mistrust Legion and the orthodox geth (Legion and the orthodox geth are willing to co-operate with you, but renegade-Shep doesn't roll that way, he rolls alone).

Hmm, a robotic race that only uses cold emotionless logic. I'd rather pass.

Did you know that mankind has killed millions, and millions, and millions, of its own kind?  Our species has done so much wrong, does that mean we deserve to be wiped out, even though many of us have not done wrong?

I don't believe the rachni-queen was alive during the wars.  So please don't blame the son for the sins of the father.

[Golden Owl]

Seboist wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

Because the renegade conception of "pro-human" means oppression of all non-humans.

Paragon fabrication right there.

I have always wondered about that one....I don't play renegade (tried it a couple of times, but couldn't get all the way through the games)...so don't know enough about renegade. What I have seen of renegade though hasn't actually struck me as necessarily pro human-anti alien....Question is, is Renegade pro-human-anti alien or not?

There are some dialogue options and decisions that lean that way like supporting Terra Firma in the "our own worst enemy" side quest but generally speaking renegade isn't simply "pro-human and anti-alien". The renegade path in Feros in ME1 is the best example showing that renegade isn't all about merely scheming to get humans on top.

Okay...thank you Seboist....You mean by Feros as in killing the colonists?

[SpEcIaLRyAn]

Deal with it.

[Seboist]

Golden Owl wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Barquiel wrote...

Because the renegade conception of "pro-human" means oppression of all non-humans.

Paragon fabrication right there.

I have always wondered about that one....I don't play renegade (tried it a couple of times, but couldn't get all the way through the games)...so don't know enough about renegade. What I have seen of renegade though hasn't actually struck me as necessarily pro human-anti alien....Question is, is Renegade pro-human-anti alien or not?

There are some dialogue options and decisions that lean that way like supporting Terra Firma in the "our own worst enemy" side quest but generally speaking renegade isn't simply "pro-human and anti-alien". The renegade path in Feros in ME1 is the best example showing that renegade isn't all about merely scheming to get humans on top.

Okay...thank you Seboist....You mean by Feros as in killing the colonists?

Yep.

[LilyasAvalon]

Seboist wrote...

- Rachni are a threat to all galactic life and merely taking the word of the Queen who's in no position to bargain is foolish. Oh and by releasing the Queen you're pissing on the graves of the ancestors of all Krogans who died in the millions to stop them previously but since Bioware has their holy paladins covered you won't have to worry about it of course.

- Both the neutral and renegade options are one in the same. The only difference is Shepard having some malice with the latter that doesn't even make any difference afterwords.

- Destroying the heretic geth isn't just about not trusting Legion's geth(which is a great blind leap of faith) but preventing the risk of of the heretics memories/perspective from corrupting them ("traumatizing" in Shepard's words). This should also win favor with the Quarians for renegade Shepard but given Bioware's past track record it isn't likely.

- Not really, let's Rachni DO good bad again, the only ones who can defeat them? Krogan. You're giving the chance Krogan to redeem themselves. It's why I was comfortable with letting her go, we had Wrex to watch our back.

- Renegade is allowing emotion to come into the picture then and can be seen just as bad as paragons. The only difference is, while paragons let empathy rule them, renegades let their rage and anger rule them.

- The only problem with this is that it throws out the balance between Quarian/Geth. Keep in mind, Legion even says that any chance/weakness the quarians saw in the geth, they took it with guns blazing. Besides, is this choice really a paragon/renegade? Even Devs admitted this choice with a morality tear up.