431 réponses à ce sujet

[Sidney]

Kasai666 wrote...

OR you can use the CASIE. Even then, its not always an option. They should make dialogue in ME3 like DX:HR, where you actually need to THINK about waht you pick. 

In some cases, the manipulation in DX, that works but a lot of the ME2 dialog isn't persuasion or outcome oriented it is about character definition. The problem is most of the people here are, like you, trying to not role play a character but game a system to get the "best" outcome. That's really not all that important to me. Jensen doesn't seem to be a coherent character because his dialog options are usually missing any sense of an option I'd want based on how I role played a previous option. They disconnected puzzles to be solved not build a character,

[Boiny Bunny]

In Exile wrote...

No, you keep falling into the same trap. You're looking at the outcome you want. That's not how it works. It's supposed to be about you picking the line of dialogue that you want. And then there are consequences from that (like + persuasion or - persuasion).

But that is the problem - you should be able to pick the line of dialogue that you want in any given situation - but you can't.  Instead, you are locked into one choice every time a paragon/renegade option comes up, unless you have exploited a glitch.

Essentially, it boils down to:

If I'm playing an ME paragon, and I want to get something out of dialogue, I pick blue, no thought or consideration whatsoever.

If I'm playing an ME renegade, and I want to get something out of dialogue, I pick red, no thought or consideration whatsoever.

Or you could not do either of this, and actually play whatever character you want, and pick whatever options you want. You know, the exact same thing you do in DX.

But I can't.  That is the problem.  I would love to be able to sometimes pick the paragon option, when I happen to agree with it, and sometimes pick the renegade option, when I agree with it.  Unfortunately, without exploiting the game, I cannot do this.

Modifié par Boiny Bunny, 31 août 2011 - 01:14 .

[Anacronian Stryx]

The Casie augmentation instead of the silly Paragon/renegade dialogue options.

[Tommy6860]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

In Exile wrote...

No, you keep falling into the same trap. You're looking at the outcome you want. That's not how it works. It's supposed to be about you picking the line of dialogue that you want. And then there are consequences from that (like + persuasion or - persuasion).

But that is the problem - you should be able to pick the line of dialogue that you want in any given situation - but you can't.  Instead, you are locked into one choice every time a paragon/renegade option comes up, unless you have exploited a glitch.

Essentially, it boils down to:

If I'm playing an ME paragon, and I want to get something out of dialogue, I pick blue, no thought or consideration whatsoever.

If I'm playing an ME renegade, and I want to get something out of dialogue, I pick red, no thought or consideration whatsoever.

Or you could not do either of this, and actually play whatever character you want, and pick whatever options you want. You know, the exact same thing you do in DX.

But I can't.  That is the problem.  I would love to be able to sometimes pick the paragon option, when I happen to agree with it, and sometimes pick the renegade option, when I agree with it.  Unfortunately, without exploiting the game, I cannot do this.

You do, however, get that choice of P/R by the time you've made it into your 3rd playthrough, carrying over the same character from previous endings in ME. But, I find that defeating the purpose of makiing meaningful choices anyway. I would rather have all options right there for the choosing from the outset, with the dialogue choice I make being the dialogue in the response, like DE:HR.

Modifié par Tommy6860, 31 août 2011 - 01:21 .

[Boiny Bunny]

Sidney wrote...

Kasai666 wrote...

OR you can use the CASIE. Even then, its not always an option. They should make dialogue in ME3 like DX:HR, where you actually need to THINK about waht you pick. 

In some cases, the manipulation in DX, that works but a lot of the ME2 dialog isn't persuasion or outcome oriented it is about character definition. The problem is most of the people here are, like you, trying to not role play a character but game a system to get the "best" outcome. That's really not all that important to me. Jensen doesn't seem to be a coherent character because his dialog options are usually missing any sense of an option I'd want based on how I role played a previous option. They disconnected puzzles to be solved not build a character,

That's an interesting point - but I see things the other way around.  I find the concept of a character that always makes paragon or renegade decisions (what you are calling a consistent character), without ever giving any consideration to the alternative, to be incredibly unrealistic and immersion breaking.

There are nice people and mean people out there, and neither type always sticks to their stereotype.

I personally, in real life, do not go into a conversation with somebody, and think, what should I say, that is consistent with my historical responses to these types of conversations?  Do you?

I evaluate each and every conversation separately, based on the information that I have at the time.  Regardless of my Shepard being a paragon more often than not, I always kill Balak in Bring Down the Sky, and let the hostages die.  The risk of letting him go, is simply too great. 

IMO, that is the essence of roleplaying.  Putting yourself into your characters shoes at the moment of a decision, and making it.  Deciding from the outset that you as the player, want to develop a 'nice guy' who is consistent with all of his/her decisions, is not so much roleplaying, as it is meta-gaming.

[Locutus_of_BORG]

Annata wrote...

Locutus_of_BORG wrote...

Annata wrote...

The Augmentation, since it's entirely unrealistic that humans still run around in their natural bodies.

You guys need to read the class descriptions more closely. Most of the classes, especially the tech and combat clasees are Aug'd in some way. Regardless, Shepard himself is heavily Nano AND Mech Aug'd in ME2 as part of the Lazarus project, hence upgrades like Heavy Muscle Weave, etc., etc., which let him/her beat Krogan to death with his/her bare hands.


Regardless of these, if you've played DEHR, you'll know that a lot of gameplay features in that game will also be present in some form in ME3, including a fuller steath system (as opposed to the fetal one in Arrival). ME3 will still be a squad shooter first though, so don't expect a strong focus on stealth missions.

Yes but only Shep. Life extenting artificial organs  and nanotech should be readily availlable on a massive scale. Scientists today already talk about being able to grow every organ in a lab in the next 20 years and doubling the human lifespan in meantime. 250 years from now, lving as long as the Asari should be easily achievebale for humans

Garrus is aug'd. Also note that certain NPCs will also mention some sort of mech/nano/genetic aug'ing throughout both games. Cybernetics are commonplace in ME. Also, there's the Quarians, that autistic dude from Overlord and to an extent, the Geth... Mass Effect's universe is more advanced than DE / DEHR as far as techno singularity is involved - it's just that the games don't focus on it the way DE does. Mass Effect can be called a "Post-Cyberpunk" work, as opposed to DE, which is pretty much pure Cyberpunk.

[Boiny Bunny]

I would call ME a classic space opera. Essentially, no element of it is remarkably 'cyberpunk' at all.

[The Spamming Troll]

how do you guys not like jensens voice????

say outloud "i never asked for this."

and then try to convince yourself you dont sound awesome trying to do so.

then say it as shepard, and youll prolly make some kind of barney the dinosaur impresion.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 31 août 2011 - 01:37 .

[Kasai666]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

how do you guys not like jensens voice????

say outloud "i never asked for this."

and then try to convince yourself you dont sound awesome trying to do so.

then say it as shepard, and youll prolly make some kind of barney the dinosaur impresion.

I never said I hated his voice. His voice is pure epic with a side of awesomesauce. Lucky me can kinda imitate his voice. It doesn't sound dead on, but it sounds a hell of a lot like it. 

[In Exile]

Boiny Bunny wrote...

But that is the problem - you should be able to pick the line of dialogue that you want in any given situation - but you can't.  Instead, you are locked into one choice every time a paragon/renegade option comes up, unless you have exploited a glitch.

The top right and botton right options seldom lead to the same ending in ME2. The paragon and rengade are just the "best outcome" with a different flavour. If the line never showed up instead of being greyed out (like the incite crowd line with Tali's trial) would it bother you that you can't pick it? 

But I can't.  That is the problem.  I would love to be able to sometimes pick the paragon option, when I happen to agree with it, and sometimes pick the renegade option, when I agree with it.  Unfortunately, without exploiting the game, I cannot do this.

But you don't want the paragon or renegade wording; it sounds like you want the paragon or renegade outcome. 

[Ryzaki]

I defintely want the paraphrasing. I despise ME's guess what Shep's gonna say game.

[The Spamming Troll]

ive been talking like jensen for the past week. i really like his voice alot. im almost addicted to it.

i went to mcdonalds, ordered a cheeseburger and i got a hamburger. my response was "i never asked for this."

i immediately felt awesome.

[Il Divo]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

how do you guys not like jensens voice????

say outloud "i never asked for this."

and then try to convince yourself you dont sound awesome trying to do so.

then say it as shepard, and youll prolly make some kind of barney the dinosaur impresion.

Is it a bad sign that I'm constantly thinking about the trailer music in the back of my mind? 

Edit: And agreed on Jensen's voice actor. I thought it was excellent.

Modifié par Il Divo, 31 août 2011 - 01:57 .

[Sesshomaru47]

make hacking, hacking not matchey matchey or a QTE. I like hacking Deus Ex and I've gotten rather good at it...or that could be the augments.

[Ryzaki]

The Spamming Troll wrote...

ive been talking like jensen for the past week. i really like his voice alot. im almost addicted to it.

i went to mcdonalds, ordered a cheeseburger and i got a hamburger. my response was "i never asked for this."

i immediately felt awesome.

I love his voice over in the "let humanity choose their path" ending. Sent chills down my spine. 

[Gatt9]

Sidney wrote...

Kasai666 wrote...

OR you can use the CASIE. Even then, its not always an option. They should make dialogue in ME3 like DX:HR, where you actually need to THINK about waht you pick. 

In some cases, the manipulation in DX, that works but a lot of the ME2 dialog isn't persuasion or outcome oriented it is about character definition. The problem is most of the people here are, like you, trying to not role play a character but game a system to get the "best" outcome. That's really not all that important to me. Jensen doesn't seem to be a coherent character because his dialog options are usually missing any sense of an option I'd want based on how I role played a previous option. They disconnected puzzles to be solved not build a character,

Actually he's right,  and you're technically promoting a non-Roleplaying system.

Roleplaying involves the recognition of personalities other than Good and Evil.  It is possible to be good at times,  evil at others. 

A good example would be JJ. Abrams Star Trek.  Spock is a good person,  he fights on the side of good,  he tries to save and protect others.  But when the renegade romulans were being sucked into a black hole,  and Kirk offered to save them,  Spock advocated murdering them.  He wasn't at all open to the possibility of mercy.

In a Bioware game that wouldn't be possible,  since Spock had picked all of the good options,  he wouldn't be "Bad enough" to condemn the romulans,  no matter how he felt.

It's not Roleplaying when the game forces you to be 100% good,  or not be good enough to say/do something terribly mundane.  It's forcing you into one of two paths,  either be good,  or be mean,  but in Bioware's universe,  there's no neutral.  No emotion-fueled decisions.

Ideally,  a Roleplaying game would develop itself around your actions and offer dialogue options consistent with how you played your character,  rather than railroad you into one extreme or the other,  or be forced to play without any moral-based dialogue.

[habitat 67]

Gatt9 wrote...

Sidney wrote...

Kasai666 wrote...

OR you can use the CASIE. Even then, its not always an option. They should make dialogue in ME3 like DX:HR, where you actually need to THINK about waht you pick. 

In some cases, the manipulation in DX, that works but a lot of the ME2 dialog isn't persuasion or outcome oriented it is about character definition. The problem is most of the people here are, like you, trying to not role play a character but game a system to get the "best" outcome. That's really not all that important to me. Jensen doesn't seem to be a coherent character because his dialog options are usually missing any sense of an option I'd want based on how I role played a previous option. They disconnected puzzles to be solved not build a character,

Actually he's right,  and you're technically promoting a non-Roleplaying system.

Roleplaying involves the recognition of personalities other than Good and Evil.  It is possible to be good at times,  evil at others. 

A good example would be JJ. Abrams Star Trek.  Spock is a good person,  he fights on the side of good,  he tries to save and protect others.  But when the renegade romulans were being sucked into a black hole,  and Kirk offered to save them,  Spock advocated murdering them.  He wasn't at all open to the possibility of mercy.

In a Bioware game that wouldn't be possible,  since Spock had picked all of the good options,  he wouldn't be "Bad enough" to condemn the romulans,  no matter how he felt.

It's not Roleplaying when the game forces you to be 100% good,  or not be good enough to say/do something terribly mundane.  It's forcing you into one of two paths,  either be good,  or be mean,  but in Bioware's universe,  there's no neutral.  No emotion-fueled decisions.

Ideally,  a Roleplaying game would develop itself around your actions and offer dialogue options consistent with how you played your character,  rather than railroad you into one extreme or the other,  or be forced to play without any moral-based dialogue.

Be kind to Spock. He's an alien.

[Eckswhyzee]

Gatt9 wrote...

Sidney wrote...

Kasai666 wrote...

OR you can use the CASIE. Even then, its not always an option. They should make dialogue in ME3 like DX:HR, where you actually need to THINK about waht you pick. 

In some cases, the manipulation in DX, that works but a lot of the ME2 dialog isn't persuasion or outcome oriented it is about character definition. The problem is most of the people here are, like you, trying to not role play a character but game a system to get the "best" outcome. That's really not all that important to me. Jensen doesn't seem to be a coherent character because his dialog options are usually missing any sense of an option I'd want based on how I role played a previous option. They disconnected puzzles to be solved not build a character,

Actually he's right,  and you're technically promoting a non-Roleplaying system.

Roleplaying involves the recognition of personalities other than Good and Evil.  It is possible to be good at times,  evil at others. 

A good example would be JJ. Abrams Star Trek.  Spock is a good person,  he fights on the side of good,  he tries to save and protect others.  But when the renegade romulans were being sucked into a black hole,  and Kirk offered to save them,  Spock advocated murdering them.  He wasn't at all open to the possibility of mercy.

In a Bioware game that wouldn't be possible,  since Spock had picked all of the good options,  he wouldn't be "Bad enough" to condemn the romulans,  no matter how he felt.

It's not Roleplaying when the game forces you to be 100% good,  or not be good enough to say/do something terribly mundane.  It's forcing you into one of two paths,  either be good,  or be mean,  but in Bioware's universe,  there's no neutral.  No emotion-fueled decisions.

Ideally,  a Roleplaying game would develop itself around your actions and offer dialogue options consistent with how you played your character,  rather than railroad you into one extreme or the other,  or be forced to play without any moral-based dialogue.

RE: The bold part. The only problematic thing about P/R is when it gets linked to persuading people. In ME2 isn't it more like you are P/R enough to defuse a hostage situation or soemthing similarly unusual? I just accept that ME2 puts your Shepard on some hero/antihero sliding scale.

Anyway I don't really care about either ME games morality system, I usually cheat to get all the dialogue options I want.

"Ideally,  a Roleplaying game would develop itself around your actions
and offer dialogue options consistent with how you played your
character,  rather than railroad you into one extreme or the other,  or
be forced to play without any moral-based dialogue."

--IMHO, an ideal roleplaying game would give you many different dialogue options. You might think that means you can create inconsistent characters, but I believe this just means there's more options for the players. Don't want a bipolar protagonist? Then don't make one. Also, persuasion would be different to each situation and be a bit more like DX in that you persuade different people by taking advantage of whatever weaknesses they have.

[The Spamming Troll]

Gatt9 wrote...

Sidney wrote...

Kasai666 wrote...

OR you can use the CASIE. Even then, its not always an option. They should make dialogue in ME3 like DX:HR, where you actually need to THINK about waht you pick. 

In some cases, the manipulation in DX, that works but a lot of the ME2 dialog isn't persuasion or outcome oriented it is about character definition. The problem is most of the people here are, like you, trying to not role play a character but game a system to get the "best" outcome. That's really not all that important to me. Jensen doesn't seem to be a coherent character because his dialog options are usually missing any sense of an option I'd want based on how I role played a previous option. They disconnected puzzles to be solved not build a character,

Actually he's right,  and you're technically promoting a non-Roleplaying system.

Roleplaying involves the recognition of personalities other than Good and Evil.  It is possible to be good at times,  evil at others. 

A good example would be JJ. Abrams Star Trek.  Spock is a good person,  he fights on the side of good,  he tries to save and protect others.  But when the renegade romulans were being sucked into a black hole,  and Kirk offered to save them,  Spock advocated murdering them.  He wasn't at all open to the possibility of mercy.

In a Bioware game that wouldn't be possible,  since Spock had picked all of the good options,  he wouldn't be "Bad enough" to condemn the romulans,  no matter how he felt.

It's not Roleplaying when the game forces you to be 100% good,  or not be good enough to say/do something terribly mundane.  It's forcing you into one of two paths,  either be good,  or be mean,  but in Bioware's universe,  there's no neutral.  No emotion-fueled decisions.

Ideally,  a Roleplaying game would develop itself around your actions and offer dialogue options consistent with how you played your character,  rather than railroad you into one extreme or the other,  or be forced to play without any moral-based dialogue.

"alignment playing"

how come nobody has picked up on this awesome term i created for ME2?

[In Exile]

Gatt9 wrote...
In a Bioware game that wouldn't be possible,  since Spock had picked all of the good options,  he wouldn't be "Bad enough" to condemn the romulans,  no matter how he felt.

You're wrong. Spock could condemn them, but he couldn't threaten them Kirk to make him back down, because Kirk wouldn't believe him. Renegade scores translate into intimidation as a persuade: I'm so "bad" that I will kill you unless you do what I want. Paragon scores translate into charisma as a persuade: I'm so "charismatic" that I can make you see my PoV and adopt my morality. 

Spock could still try to be good or bad (uselessly contend or kill someone) but those correspond to the moral alignment of "top right" and "botton right" on the dialogue wheel. 

It's not Roleplaying when the game forces you to be 100% good,  or not be good enough to say/do something terribly mundane.  It's forcing you into one of two paths,  either be good,  or be mean,  but in Bioware's universe,  there's no neutral.  No emotion-fueled decisions.

No, the game doesn't. The game gives you a bonus in terms of the personality for being commited to a course of action, but that's nothing special. 

Ideally,  a Roleplaying game would develop itself around your actions and offer dialogue options consistent with how you played your character,  rather than railroad you into one extreme or the other,  or be forced to play without any moral-based dialogue.

You're not forced to play with any morality based dialogue. You're just not threatening enough or charismatic enough (for example) to have Miranda and Jack both back down. 

Modifié par In Exile, 31 août 2011 - 03:35 .

[Clonedzero]

really? i hated the CASIE aug. i dont want things telling me what to say. i wanna do the convos myself. i reloaded since i didnt want it going "pick this choice dummy!"

actually some of the more rewarding spots in the game came from me messing up the convo lol.
*minor spoilers*

when you're trying to get into the police station and you mess up that convo, stealthing through the police station without hurting anyone cus hell, im not gonna hurt some cops was so rewarding. took me forever, but it was great.

[whywhywhywhy]

When I make the comparison I find myself gravitating towards buying Deus Ex: Human revolution instead of me3 when me3 is released.

[Il Divo]

whywhywhywhy wrote...

When I make the comparison I find myself gravitating towards buying Deus Ex: Human revolution instead of me3 when me3 is released.

Are the two options mutually exclusive?

[The Spamming Troll]

In Exile wrote...

Gatt9 wrote...
In a Bioware game that wouldn't be possible,  since Spock had picked all of the good options,  he wouldn't be "Bad enough" to condemn the romulans,  no matter how he felt.

You're wrong. Spock could condemn them, but he couldn't threaten them Kirk to make him back down, because Kirk wouldn't believe him. Renegade scores translate into intimidation as a persuade: I'm so "bad" that I will kill you unless you do what I want. Paragon scores translate into charisma as a persuade: I'm so "charismatic" that I can make you see my PoV and adopt my morality. 

Spock could still try to be good or bad (uselessly contend or kill someone) but those correspond to the moral alignment of "top right" and "botton right" on the dialogue wheel. 

It's not Roleplaying when the game forces you to be 100% good,  or not be good enough to say/do something terribly mundane.  It's forcing you into one of two paths,  either be good,  or be mean,  but in Bioware's universe,  there's no neutral.  No emotion-fueled decisions.

No, the game doesn't. The game gives you a bonus in terms of the personality for being commited to a course of action, but that's nothing special. 

Ideally,  a Roleplaying game would develop itself around your actions and offer dialogue options consistent with how you played your character,  rather than railroad you into one extreme or the other,  or be forced to play without any moral-based dialogue.

You're not forced to play with any morality based dialogue. You're just not threatening enough or charismatic enough (for example) to have Miranda and Jack both back down. 

i think gatt knows how the dialogue system works in ME2. hes complainging about it, not misunderstanding it.

lets say me and you just met in the MEuniverse. your unsure if im a paragon or a renegade which you should be. how are you going to know what i did or didnt do on that one random sidequest? then lets say i point a gun at your head and say "answer this question or your dead." now are you going to answer the question? or maybe you heard on the extranet i helped a grandma cross the road a few days ago which you think means i wont actually pull the trigger because im sortof a nice guy. wellp, too bad for you, because now your dead.

Modifié par The Spamming Troll, 31 août 2011 - 04:47 .

[MrChowderClam]

Locutus_of_BORG wrote...

Garrus is aug'd.

Sorry, I had to do it:

Modifié par MrChowderClam, 31 août 2011 - 05:07 .