631 réponses à ce sujet

[SandTrout]

Seboist wrote...

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.

When it is applied in such a rediculous manner as making it the primary source of persuasion, I agree. ME1 handled it well, but ME2 was just silly.

[Seboist]

SandTrout wrote...

Seboist wrote...

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.

When it is applied in such a rediculous manner as making it the primary source of persuasion, I agree. ME1 handled it well, but ME2 was just silly.

ME1 was pretty flawed too. The amount of points you could put in charm or intimidate was dependant on how much your two renegade/paragon bars were filled up. I was only able to max out both persuasions in a new game+.

[SandTrout]

Seboist wrote...

ME1 was pretty flawed too. The amount of points you could put in charm or intimidate was dependant on how much your two renegade/paragon bars were filled up. I was only able to max out both persuasions in a new game+.

True, but it was easy to max out at least 1 option, even if you were pretty heavy on the opposing alignment.

[sorentoft]

The good thing about being paragon is that you can always give a speech and make people cry for forgiveness.

[Arppis]

Well, you can usualy see from miles way which choice gives best results and which doesn't. Doesn't always have to be paragon choice that does this. I don't REALLY care which color it is. I just pick the one that will benefit everyone the most. So, if the best options will be renegade in ME3, then I'll just pick those. So far they happen to be paragon mostly.

sorentoft wrote...

The good thing about being paragon is that you can always give a speech and make people cry for forgiveness.

And after that stand in pilar of light, chin up being CONSIDERABLY better than them.

Modifié par Arppis, 25 août 2011 - 09:41 .

[shep82]

Goneaviking wrote...

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.

Very well put.

[Aoba]

Obviously. Freeing the Rachni queen comes to mind as a decision that may feel right at first, but in the end, here hell go come in ME3. There are other Paragonish decisions, I'm sure, that won't start right and stay right. Perfect example of nice guys/gals finish last, eh? Or, uh, something like that... might just be the wine talkin', though. Yep, totally the wine. *coughs*