631 réponses à ce sujet

[habitat 67]

I'd like to do some mud wrestling.

[Sisterofshane]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

Sisterofshane wrote...

And if you must know, yes.  I do enjoy games that offer you absolutely no choice in regards to the story.  Games that give you a chance to build up a character from within that story, and make it meaningful and personal.  You want a game where you have COMPLETE control over character and universe?  Go play the Sims.  I personally enjoy a good story as much or more then "shaping" a world around a static sharacter.

It seems to me that you might be playing the wrong games then (Mass Effect trilogy).  From the start, Mass Effect has been marketed for its choices and consequences following those choices.  I don't want complete control over the character and universe, that is an exaggeration to the point of ridiculousness - nor does the Sims even come close to offering that.  I quite simply, want my decisions to have consequences.  Some work out the way you thought they would, some don't.  Given that the entire marketing campaign for Mass Effect has been centred around consequences for choices, I don't think that's an unreasonable expectation.

I am not playing the wrong game.  I am simply playing it in a way that makes it more enjoyable for me.  I refuse to hang myself up on every single decision having a contingent consequence.  What I am hoping for ME3 is that I can take two completely different characters, who have different attitudes and make different decisions, and come out with two completely different stories.  Not so different from you, except for that I am not looking at the consequences as being testimony for being the right decision or the wrong decision.

If my Paragon Shep has to deal with another attempt from Balak, or learns that Balak has suceeded in some way, it will be another layer to add to my character.  My Renegade Shep will kill him every time, regardless of the fact that nothing would have happened anyway and he needlessly sacrficed five people.  I play this way because in real life, there is no reason to second guess your decisions.

And the reason why I suggested that you might be questioning yourself is because you seem to be basing the decision solely on the fact of whether there will be consequences or not.  Realisticly, not every desicion made in our lives will have discernable consequences.  Even when it seems to be a major desicion.  If it makes it a more enjoyable game for you to know the outcome, and play the game based upon the certainty of one, I have no beef with it.  For me, I would rather deal with the situation in the moment and deal with any consequences later, and have a character and story that makes SENSE to that character's personality, and is enjoyable to me, then have an inconsistent character just because I might get "punished"  for a decision later on.

No, that's the exact problem with Mass Effect's paragon/renegade system in general.  It forces you to create a character that must be consistent within their chosen tone (nice or mean), and cannot choose logically for each decision, because they are stuck to their chosen tone.  This results in two types of characters, and nothing in between.  If I want to be a paragon in ME2, nearly every single decision I make in the entire game must be paragon, even if I disagree with them, because the game heavily penalises you for not sticking to your chosen tone.

A paragon who chooses to kill Balak however is not in any way, an inconsistent character.  It's a character who tries to do the right thing and save as many lives as possible, but when placed in a situation where millions of lives may be put at risk for saving 5, simply cannot take that risk.

I happen to agree with you on this.  The morality system, as written, pigeon-holes the "role-player" into making certain game decisions that they would not have normally made.  Balak is a great example, although I understand why they did it.  Not every decision molds perfectly into the Paragon/Renegade defintion, and sometimes can seem outright silly and hypocritical.  It would have been better to seperate the story-line decisions from the dialogue system -- and from the paragon/renegade system as well.  If they used the morality system to merely set the players character (through dialogue and such), but allow storyline decisions to be made regardless of morality, it would have been much better for me in that I could ascribe my own reasons to the decision I made.  

Balak is a great example!  Maybe as a paragon, I felt that it would be morally better to capture/kill Balak and not risk future life, perhaps at a small sacrifice.  But within this game, choosing the renegade option does specifically go against any paragon character - usually because Bioware themselves have set a given reason for it.  Like BotC and saving the Destiny Ascension -- the renegade option, while being the most logical, also happens to be the most emotional.  It implies that Shepard is glad that the coucil members will die. ( I still don't like that when choosing the neutral option, there is no chance to defend your choice in ME2 as being logically based).

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Boiny Bunny wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

I think I will, I want to see what Ash says when I cheat on her for Jack...

She'll probably slap you, run off, then completely and utterly forget it ever happened and continue to serve under you exactly as she was before.

yeah, thanks bunny.


Way to be a downer.

lol, sorry - what were you expecting?  A mud-wrestling duel between the two?

Yes.

Hence the breast straps,duh.

Modifié par Humanoid_Typhoon, 25 août 2011 - 01:37 .

[Boiny Bunny]

I definately agree with you that big decisions should be entirely separated from Shepard's character/tone.

There are times when I want to be able to make a renegade decision without sounding like an ass, and vice versa. The trouble with the ME2 system is it forces you to meta game to get as many points for whichever path you are going up (paragon or renegade), thus you often end up not being able to make the decisions that you'd like to.

To be perfectly honest, I'm not even sure that the paragon/renegade systems add anything to the game. They scrapped them entirely in DA:O and it worked beautifully.

I will always kill Balak, for fear of the consequences of letting him go - but it would be nice to be able to choose whether Shepard does it because he/she honestly doesn't care about the hostages, or is actually very sympathetic to the hostages but there is just no other way.

[Boiny Bunny]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Boiny Bunny wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Boiny Bunny wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

I think I will, I want to see what Ash says when I cheat on her for Jack...

She'll probably slap you, run off, then completely and utterly forget it ever happened and continue to serve under you exactly as she was before.

yeah, thanks bunny.


Way to be a downer.

lol, sorry - what were you expecting?  A mud-wrestling duel between the two?

Yes.

Hence the breast straps,duh.

lol

[Killjoy Cutter]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Heh... maybe the Asari couple who can't leave the Citadel really are Geth agents.

I don't see why anybody would ever side with them when you have this scene.

I've never seen that scene. 

[Sir Ulrich Von Lichenstien]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Heh... maybe the Asari couple who can't leave the Citadel really are Geth agents.

I don't see why anybody would ever side with them when you have this scene.

One of my favourite scenes from ME2, I laughed so much first time I got it with my main Renegade FemShep

[Goneaviking]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

No, that's the exact problem with Mass Effect's paragon/renegade system in general.  It forces you to create a character that must be consistent within their chosen tone (nice or mean), and cannot choose logically for each decision, because they are stuck to their chosen tone.  This results in two types of characters, and nothing in between.  If I want to be a paragon in ME2, nearly every single decision I make in the entire game must be paragon, even if I disagree with them, because the game heavily penalises you for not sticking to your chosen tone.

A paragon who chooses to kill Balak however is not in any way, an inconsistent character.  It's a character who tries to do the right thing and save as many lives as possible, but when placed in a situation where millions of lives may be put at risk for saving 5, simply cannot take that risk.

You can choose whatever course of action you like from the options presented, based on whatever criteria you choose. Some options are only open if you've behaved in a manner that the developers initially perceived as consistent to one of the paths, but you're not forced to stick with the blue options (or red ones) once you've decided to play a moral (or immoral) character.

If you want to be a paragon then yes, you do need to make almost all of your decisions according to what the game regards as the paragon alternative, if you didn't then want to make paragon decisions then why try to play a paragon?

What punishment you get for ignoring the distinction is actually fairly minor really, so you lose a few automatic wins in a few conversations and some of your crew hate you. Such is life, even in computer games apparently.

As for making decisions based on their perceived vs actual outcome? If you like to replay for the perfect win that's as valid as any other way of playing and I won't fault you for it, but with the first runthrough you're just guessing at the outcome. The example you provided earlier about the horse race is flawed because the game sample you're referring to invokes ethical decisions rather than just "press A to win credits." It would be nice to know what happens after you (maybe) let Balak get away, but it doesn't impact the morality used in the decision.

Also worth remembering is that Balak is relatively small fry, what happens to him wouldn't necessarily make it to Shepard's attention given that he has bigger problems to deal with. For all we know he could go on to become a religious hermit preaching non-violence and bunny-cuddling, there's no reason that sort of development would ever make the news and it wouldn't erase his crimes regardless.

Modifié par Goneaviking, 25 août 2011 - 03:54 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

In ME2, if you don't stick to one extreme, you have the Tali/Legion conflict, and the Miranda/Jack conflict, that you cannot resolve. You are not allowed to say what will defuse the conflicts and retain both squadmates "loyalty", and someone is likely to die on the Omega 4 mission.

[littlezack]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

In ME2, if you don't stick to one extreme, you have the Tali/Legion conflict, and the Miranda/Jack conflict, that you cannot resolve. You are not allowed to say what will defuse the conflicts and retain both squadmates "loyalty", and someone is likely to die on the Omega 4 mission.

Not sure about the Miranda/Jack conflict, but with Tali/Legion, it is possible to reconcile with Legion afterwards and regain loyalty if you turned him down the first time.

[Destroy Raiden_]

You can get Jack or Miranda back but for me I had to be 100% para in order to do it so usually one of them dies sense I'm a paragade. But I find the situation dumb for both cases both people were right yet we needed to be parablue in order to say it? Why wasn't that line just a neutral response that got the job done again?

[Boiny Bunny]

That's the point. The game is directly punishing you, or giving you a disadvantage, automatically guaranteeing that at least one squadmate will die, if you are not 100% paragon or 100% renegade.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

That's the point. The game is directly punishing you, or giving you a disadvantage, automatically guaranteeing that at least one squadmate will die, if you are not 100% paragon or 100% renegade.

Eh, if you got Zaeed+ Grunt+Garrus' loyalty you can pretty much not have anyone elses loyalty (mind you you still need the upgrades.) and not lose anyone.


Of course Miranda has god mode on until the last part anyway....

Modifié par Humanoid_Typhoon, 25 août 2011 - 06:13 .

[Boiny Bunny]

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Boiny Bunny wrote...

That's the point. The game is directly punishing you, or giving you a disadvantage, automatically guaranteeing that at least one squadmate will die, if you are not 100% paragon or 100% renegade.

Eh, if you got Zaeed+ Grunt+Garrus' loyalty you can pretty much not have anyone elses loyalty (mind you you still need the upgrades.) and not lose anyone.


Of course Miranda has god mode on until the last part anyway....

Evidently I haven't played the suicide mission enough - no idea what you are talking about with respect to god mode for Miranda?

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Boiny Bunny wrote...

That's the point. The game is directly punishing you, or giving you a disadvantage, automatically guaranteeing that at least one squadmate will die, if you are not 100% paragon or 100% renegade.

Eh, if you got Zaeed+ Grunt+Garrus' loyalty you can pretty much not have anyone elses loyalty (mind you you still need the upgrades.) and not lose anyone.


Of course Miranda has god mode on until the last part anyway....

Evidently I haven't played the suicide mission enough - no idea what you are talking about with respect to god mode for Miranda?

She CANNOT  die until the last portion of the SM

[Zarathiel]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

Humanoid_Typhoon wrote...

Boiny Bunny wrote...

That's the point. The game is directly punishing you, or giving you a disadvantage, automatically guaranteeing that at least one squadmate will die, if you are not 100% paragon or 100% renegade.

Eh, if you got Zaeed+ Grunt+Garrus' loyalty you can pretty much not have anyone elses loyalty (mind you you still need the upgrades.) and not lose anyone.


Of course Miranda has god mode on until the last part anyway....

Evidently I haven't played the suicide mission enough - no idea what you are talking about with respect to god mode for Miranda?

She survives being fire team leader even if she's non-loyal.

Ninja'd

Modifié par Zarathiel, 25 août 2011 - 06:20 .

[Boiny Bunny]

Interesting. I wonder if that's intentional...Ah well, too late for me to experiment with now!

[Destroy Raiden_]

But any unloyal people will be dead or not return to your ship spare Zaeed. For instance Miranda is unloyal I keep her out of everything and at the end of the game you will see her body on the ground. I've also had 2 people unloyal because I got sick of doing their missions one was shown dead on screen the other disappeared from my ship. So they can not be used anywhere and still die.

[ObserverStatus]

Personally, I'd like the Paragon Choices to get some of the better outcomes, and some of the Renegade choices too. Being right all of the time in video games isn't as much fun as having to deal with it when you're not.

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

@bobo,indeed.

[Boiny Bunny]

bobobo878 wrote...

Personally, I'd like the Paragon Choices to get some of the better outcomes, and some of the Renegade choices too. Being right all of the time in video games isn't as much fun as having to deal with it when you're not.

That's what I'd like to see - and essentially the point of this thread

[Nashiktal]

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

My only concern is that, again, Bioware will reward the extremes, and punish the moderates who care little about their bipolar simplistic sense of morality.

Quoting because it needs to be repeated.

Bioware did better with nuetrality in me2... but it is still gimps shep out of some important choices if you don't build up that damn p or r bar.

[Seboist]

Nashiktal wrote...

KnightofPhoenix wrote...

My only concern is that, again, Bioware will reward the extremes, and punish the moderates who care little about their bipolar simplistic sense of morality.

Quoting because it needs to be repeated.

Bioware did better with nuetrality in me2... but it is still gimps shep out of some important choices if you don't build up that damn p or r bar.

That a pure Paragon can recruit Morinth but not a Paragade or Renegon that doesn't have enough magic points shows how laughable the morality system really is.

Modifié par Seboist, 25 août 2011 - 08:44 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Yeah, a paragon picks up Morinth. That's a frakkin' joke, but it's true. The paragon/renegade system is the renamed Lawful Good/Chaotic Evil system. It's dated and needs to be tossed out. Funny there aren't any perks to being a paragon. The renegade gets red eyes and major glowing scars. The paragon should get gleeming sparkly teeth and a glowing aura.