Aller au contenu

Photo

Paragon choices from ME1 and 2 that could backfire in ME3

Débuté par Sethan_1 , oct. 05 2011 03:05

  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
133 réponses à ce sujet

#76
mango smoothie
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 04:47

mango smoothie
  • Members
  • 1 358 messages

unfringed wrote...

mango smoothie wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

I'm stunned, utterly stunned that people can say this when it looks like the Councilor is automatically Udina, completely eliminating one of the top three if not the top ME1 paragon choice, and it is possible that Cerberus automatically gets the Collector Base, making the ONE choice in ME2 automatically renegade.

No one seems to be able to answer that.

The answer is obviously Drew and Mass Effect: Retribution.

And the ultimate fate of the base goes both ways: Cerberus get their hand on the tech regardless of your decision, and likewise they decide to turn against you whatever you do.


That sure looks like they're making a "big choice," which they claimed would have consequences, into a static one in the favor of one side.

And how in the world would Cerberus get his hands on Collector tech without Shep's approval? Shep has the one ship with the Reaper IFF, and he/she blew up the Base (as a Par), so it should be impossible for TIM to get Collector tech...unless the renegade choice is suddenly canon.

That to me is worse than all three games being chock-full of minor Paragon extras: at least it's not the big choices that are stated will have a large impact.


Ya umm we have EDI who reports to TIM, we have Miranda who reports every thing to TIM, and then we have all the survilence equipment aboard Normandy. Ya I think it would be pretty esay for TIM to get IFF.



Yeah, except for the fact that EDI is unshackled and does what she wants now, Miranda is having loyalty issues with Cerberus, and surveilance isn't going to get TIM an IFF.


EDI doesn't get unshackled till much later after you get IFF, and I doubt Miranda (no matter if shes having loyalty problems) would not give TIM a copy of the IFF. As TIM would probably be pestering her to give him IFF.

#77
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 04:49

Guest_Cthulhu42_*
  • Guests

Rojahar wrote...

Spectre status isn't a big deal?

Spectre status isn't a big deal. It gets you absolutely nothing.

#78
Dave of Canada
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 04:50

Dave of Canada
  • Members
  • 17 484 messages

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Spectre status isn't a big deal. It gets you absolutely nothing.


It'll supposedly play some role in ME3.

#79
Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 04:50

Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
  • Guests

Rojahar wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

That sure looks like they're making a "big choice," which they claimed would have consequences, into a static one in the favor of one side.

And how in the world would Cerberus get his hands on Collector tech without Shep's approval? Shep has the one ship with the Reaper IFF, and he/she blew up the Base (as a Par), so it should be impossible for TIM to get Collector tech...unless the renegade choice is suddenly canon.

That to me is worse than all three games being chock-full of minor Paragon extras: at least it's not the big choices that are stated will have a large impact.


How is it "in the favor" of Renegades? If you're a Renegade, you're the "idiot" who gave TIM the Reaper tech. If you're Paragon, TIM got Reaper tech some other way, but you weren't the idiot who gave it to him. As the books and comics show us, believe it or not, things can still happen in the universe even when Shepard isn't involved, such as the Collector base not being the ONLY Reaper tech in the galaxy. Even if Renegades fully support TIM and Cerberus, we still have to go back to the Alliance and TIM still tries to kill us. It's no more of a "slap-to-the-face" like you cry than well... any other decision in the game. I find it hypocritical and ironic that you throw a fit over this, when it's how every other choice in the game works, except Renegades also get insulted and a lack of content.

As for the "big choices" name one big choice that ends well for Renegade? Killing the Council? Turians and Humans build up their fleet no matter what - which is just as big of an "insult" as TIM getting Reaper tech no matter what... except Renegades have the addition of everyone hating them, even the Human Council they helped create, who refuses to even talk to or help Shepard! Whereas Paragons get Spectre status, a Council cameo, and everyone wants to lick their boots. Even if we kill the Rachni, we STILL have to fight Rachni husks in ME3.


Chill out, no one's "throwing a fit."

Let's see, on the big choices...

Save Council: Absolutely nothing (see above post) There is, what, maybe one or two people that mention the fact that you saved the council...and that's not pandering or anything, that's realism. Would you expect someone who killed, say, the head of the U.N. to be treated well? Of course not. No matter how bloated the UN. is, no one (or at least few) feels the leaders need to die. People treating renegades bad is quite valid consequence.

Councilor: Better for Renegades, as Udina is a career politician.

I know there's a third choice, I can't remember it.

Rachni: You're completely right, they should not be there if you're renegade. I agree.

Collector Base: I believe the rumor is that Cerberus has Collector tech, not Reaper tech, meaning it had to come from where Shep is.

#80
unfringed
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 04:50

unfringed
  • Members
  • 79 messages

mango smoothie wrote... 

EDI doesn't get unshackled till much later after you get IFF, and I doubt Miranda (no matter if shes having loyalty problems) would not give TIM a copy of the IFF. As TIM would probably be pestering her to give him IFF.



Miranda said "consider this my resignation" simply because TIM was demanding that Shep save the base. I seriously doubt she'd give him the IFF.

The IFF is a device, also. It's not just software that can be copied and emailed. EDI couldn't have given it to TIM before she was unshackled, and now I doubt she'd want to try.

Modifié par unfringed, 05 octobre 2011 - 04:51 .

#81
mango smoothie
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 04:53

mango smoothie
  • Members
  • 1 358 messages

unfringed wrote...


mango smoothie wrote... 

EDI doesn't get unshackled till much later after you get IFF, and I doubt Miranda (no matter if shes having loyalty problems) would not give TIM a copy of the IFF. As TIM would probably be pestering her to give him IFF.



Miranda said "consider this my resignation" simply because TIM was demanding that Shep save the base. I seriously doubt she'd give him the IFF.

The IFF is a device, also. It's not just software that can be copied and emailed. EDI couldn't have given it to TIM before she was unshackled, and now I doubt she'd want to try.


A device can still be scanned and the data sent to TIM which can be used to make another IFF.

#82
Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 04:54

Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
  • Guests

Rojahar wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

And that BS about Anderson suddenly messing up, or resigning (he says in ME2 that he wouldn't resign) makes absolutely no sense.


"THE PARAGON CHOICE DOESN'T WORK OUT FOR ONCE!? THIS IS AN OUTRAGE!!! IT MAKES NO SENSE THAT A POLITICIAN IS BETTER AT PLAYING POLITICS THAN A SOLDIER!!!" :lol:

Still, you can get the Paragon ending by putting Udina on the Council. You aren't given Renegade or Paragon points for it.

The first two, in comparison to the end-game decisions, yes. And the Council, I'm not sure you can really say that the Council refusing to see you is any worse than the person who SAW A REAPER and said there it was a Reaper at the end of ME1 saying "Ah yes, Reapers."


Spectre status isn't a big deal?

You still haven't answered why Renegades don't get to meet the Human Council.

Really, you may as well be trying to argue that all of Mass Effect 1 is pointless and the game shouldn't exist because the Reapers invade anyway.


Too many posts to reply to all at once.
You're not helping your argument with your little scene up there. Just sayin'.

It has nothing to do with Udina being "better," but with Anderson messing up, which I can't see happening after his successful actions in ME2.

Spectre status in the Terminus...where they have no jurisdiction? Yeah, real big deal there. And I can't explain why they don't meet the human Council. That's a valid point.

#83
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 04:55

Guest_Cthulhu42_*
  • Guests

Dave of Canada wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Spectre status isn't a big deal. It gets you absolutely nothing.


It'll supposedly play some role in ME3.

I doubt "some role" will be anything significant. Either way, I turned the offer down.

#84
Guest_Rojahar_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 05:00

Guest_Rojahar_*
  • Guests

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Save Council: Absolutely nothing (see above post) There is, what, maybe one or two people that mention the fact that you saved the council...and that's not pandering or anything, that's realism. Would you expect someone who killed, say, the head of the U.N. to be treated well? Of course not. No matter how bloated the UN. is, no one (or at least few) feels the leaders need to die. People treating renegades bad is quite valid consequence.


Except you don't have to choose to "kill" them. At worst, you choose not to save them to put others in power - who would be appreciative. At best, you choose the middle option and told the fleet to prioritize Sovereign (saving the galaxy) instead of prioritize saving a couple politicians. How come you're treated like a murderer even if you told them to save the Council if they can but to prioritize stopping Sovereign? Shepard didn't "kill" the Council, and how would the general population even know if Shepard's intention was for them to die?

Collector Base: I believe the rumor is that Cerberus has Collector tech, not Reaper tech, meaning it had to come from where Shep is.


Get back to us when you have something more tangible than "I think I might've maybe heard a rumor somewhere, I don't even remember if it's true, but I'm gonna act like it is."

It's funny how hysterical you are over one thing in the game not being as perfect as can be for going pure paragon, but are completely dismissive of it being similar or worse for every single other renegade decision. :lol:

#85
unfringed
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 05:00

unfringed
  • Members
  • 79 messages

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Dave of Canada wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Spectre status isn't a big deal. It gets you absolutely nothing.


It'll supposedly play some role in ME3.

I doubt "some role" will be anything significant. Either way, I turned the offer down.


A "major decision" having almost no actual impact in a Bioware game? NEVER

Modifié par unfringed, 05 octobre 2011 - 05:01 .

#86
Sethan_1
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 05:01

Sethan_1
  • Members
  • 213 messages
Councilor Anderson does not rule the Alliance - he is merely the Alliance representative on the Council.

If the Alliance decides he should be replaced, then there will be a different Human Councilor - likely Udina. Given a few indoctrinated people high up in the Alliance government, and the Reapers' penchant for psychological warfare and political maneuvering by proxy, it isn't unreasonable for Anderson to be falsely accused of something and replaced.

#87
Guest_Rojahar_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 05:03

Guest_Rojahar_*
  • Guests

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Rojahar wrote...

Spectre status isn't a big deal?

Spectre status isn't a big deal. It gets you absolutely nothing.


Unless you're a roleplayer. That's the heart of this issue. There's no roleplaying or real choice in Mass Effect. You're just choosing between Right and More or Wrong and Less. Paragon always takes idealist "win it all" risks... and it always works out, and Renegade is about as valid of a path as getting your whole team killed in ME2.

#88
Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 05:07

Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
  • Guests

Rojahar wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Save Council: Absolutely nothing (see above post) There is, what, maybe one or two people that mention the fact that you saved the council...and that's not pandering or anything, that's realism. Would you expect someone who killed, say, the head of the U.N. to be treated well? Of course not. No matter how bloated the UN. is, no one (or at least few) feels the leaders need to die. People treating renegades bad is quite valid consequence.


Except you don't have to choose to "kill" them. At worst, you choose not to save them to put others in power - who would be appreciative. At best, you choose the middle option and told the fleet to prioritize Sovereign (saving the galaxy) instead of prioritize saving a couple politicians. How come you're treated like a murderer even if you told them to save the Council if they can but to prioritize stopping Sovereign? Shepard didn't "kill" the Council, and how would the general population even know if Shepard's intention was for them to die?

Collector Base: I believe the rumor is that Cerberus has Collector tech, not Reaper tech, meaning it had to come from where Shep is.


Get back to us when you have something more tangible than "I think I might've maybe heard a rumor somewhere, I don't even remember if it's true, but I'm gonna act like it is."

It's funny how hysterical you are over one thing in the game not being as perfect as can be for going pure paragon, but are completely dismissive of it being similar or worse for every single other renegade decision. :lol:


Alright, I found it impossible to take you seriously when I read this. I couldn't tell you how many times I've heard people with no leg to stand on blow their opposition's points out of proportion, for no reason except to shift attention away from themself.

This exchange is over. *glass shatters*

#89
Sethan_1
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 05:20

Sethan_1
  • Members
  • 213 messages
I didn't start this topic so people could debate whether Paragon or Renegade was more supported or a better play style.

It was intended to be a simple thought experiment on how Paragon choices in the first two games could reasonably go wrong in ME3.

#90
Guest_Rojahar_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 05:22

Guest_Rojahar_*
  • Guests

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Alright, I found it impossible to take you seriously when I read this. I couldn't tell you how many times I've heard people with no leg to stand on blow their opposition's points out of proportion, for no reason except to shift attention away from themself.

This exchange is over. *glass shatters*


Pot meet kettle? If you have valid points, I'd try to express them if I were you, instead of acting like a drama queen at the mere mention of the possibility of there being consequences for Paragon decisions.

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

I'm stunned, utterly stunned that people can say this when it looks like the Councilor is
automatically Udina, completely eliminating one of the top three if not the top ME1 paragon choice, and it is possible that Cerberus automatically gets the Collector Base, making the ONE choice in ME2 automatically renegade.

No one seems to be able to answer that.


That's already been addressed by many, and you're not only assuming a great deal, but throwing things out of proportion to try and support your argument.

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Is not the Udina option in-game renegade? And that BS about Anderson suddenly messing up, or resigning (he says in ME2 that he wouldn't resign) makes absolutely no sense.


Also has been addressed.

It would actually be nice and interesting if the reason actually turned out to be disgrace or messing up.

Also: Calm down?

The first two, in comparison to the end-game decisions, yes. And the Council, I'm not sure you can really say that the Council refusing to see you is any worse than the person who SAW A REAPER and said there it was a Reaper at the end of ME1 saying "Ah yes, Reapers."


He saw a ship. Considering the various justifications they make throughout the series, it's pretty in-character of the Turian Councillor.

Also: See Above.

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

That to me is worse than all three games being chock-full of minor Paragon extras: at least it's not the big choices that are stated will have a large impact.


[smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/lol.png[/smilie]

Modifié par Rojahar, 05 octobre 2011 - 05:26 .

#91
mango smoothie
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 05:24

mango smoothie
  • Members
  • 1 358 messages

Sethan_1 wrote...

I didn't start this topic so people could debate whether Paragon or Renegade was more supported or a better play style.

It was intended to be a simple thought experiment on how Paragon choices in the first two games could reasonably go wrong in ME3.



Yes but in the end it all goes down the same path. Strong opinions tend to totally change what the OP was suppose to be.

#92
Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 05:29

Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
  • Guests
Well I haven't seen them addressed anywhere. And really, saying something is BS means I'm "hysterical?" And the Turian Counsilor SAYS at the end of ME1 that it was a Reaper. He shouldn't be reverting back to his old beliefs.

And what is wrong with Big choice>little choices? Does that not make sense.

But I want to respect Sethan's wishes here. Sorry, man

As others have said, rewriting the Geth could cause major problems.

#93
Guest_Rojahar_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 06:08

Guest_Rojahar_*
  • Guests

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Well I haven't seen them addressed anywhere.


It's not my fault if you're just skimming over posts by Dave and others, kid.

Councilor is a neutral choice that has no effect on morality. The choice in ME2 being "ZOMG INVALIDATED" because TIM gets Reaper tech another way doesn't change that you're still not the one who gave him the Reaper tech. It's a roleplaying choice. You may as well argue no choice in any of the games matter because the Reapers invade no matter what.

You give him the base? He uses it for evil. That's your decision backfiring.

You destroy the base? He gets Reaper tech a different way. Hardly backfiring or a penalty. No moreso than the Reapers invading no matter what.

And the Turian Counsilor SAYS at the end of ME1 that it was a Reaper. He shouldn't be reverting back to his old beliefs.


Why? Have you never watched a political debate? Politicans do it all the time. I'm surprised he didn't flipflop several times within the same conversation. The Turian Councilor in particular is an incredulous character. He was adversarial every step of the way, no matter how much proof you rubbed in his face, throughout ME1. He's just as adversarial toward Renegades, so it's not some backlash for being Paragon.

And really, saying something is BS means I'm "hysterical?"


Along with your other ridiculous exaggerations and theatrics including "HOW DARE YOU!? I'M LEAVING THIS THREAD!!!" when you don't have anything to back up your statements. Funny that you told me to "calm down" but I when I suggest maybe YOU should - what with your exaggerations and "outrage", you throw a hissy fit full of ad hominem. /eyeroll

And what is wrong with Big choice>little choices? Does that not make sense.


Except there's absolutely no penalties for being Paragon, especially with the big choices, as you've admitted. Renegades have to fight Rachni Husks in ME3. You're a hero if you save the colony of Feros.

Renegade choice for the final decision leads to no Council cameos, everyone hating you if you didn't save the Council (instead of being universally praised, like if you saved them) regardless of your motives - as you can choose to prioritize stopping Sovereign, and no Spectre status if you went with Udina (whereas you still get Spectre status with Udina if you save the Council). Even in the introduction, Cerberus will praise the decision to save the Council. What drawback is there to saving the Council exactly? How does it backfire?

What drawback is there to destroying the Collector base? How does it backfire? As a Paragon, you destroy the Collector base, get the last laugh as TIM loses his cool, know that you didn't foolishly shoot yourself in the foot, and every single person praises you - even characters who should be Renegade. As a Renegade, you stupidly are the one who causes most of the problems for yourself in ME3, TIM laughs at your naivety, and every single person - even the Renegades who told you to save the base - tell you how stupid and wrong you were. You practically get a "Game Over" screen for going Renegade.

It's also interesting that going as "Renegade" as possible in ME1 leads to... the universe you get if you haven't played the game before - which is lacking in content and nobody likes you, even though Renegades SHOULD have allies. By playing through as a Paragon, you get exclusive import content. If you're "pure Renegade"... you may as well not even bother importing.

The Collector Base "backfiring" would be if Renegades could make use of the technology in it to help stop the Reapers and Cerberus, whereas Paragons would be SOL.

Modifié par Rojahar, 05 octobre 2011 - 06:09 .

#94
HogarthHughes 3
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 06:09

HogarthHughes 3
  • Members
  • 431 messages

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Well, equivalently, Liara forgets about renegade Shepard killing the rachni or the Council, and decides she misses Shepard enough to retrieve Shepard's body regardless. I guess the whole Normandy was enjoying the acid.


That whole "couldn't let you go" bit along with the armor on display is just friggen weird when I play my renegade character who barely talked to Liara outside of mandatory debrief dialogue.  But it's just another problem with characters being auto-buddies even when given other options in the previous game.  Bioware really oughta just force Shepard to be nice, or not have important story elements dependant on relationships that are subject to change.

#95
Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 06:16

Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
  • Guests

Rojahar wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Well I haven't seen them addressed anywhere.


It's not my fault if you're just skimming over posts by Dave and others, kid.

Councilor is a neutral choice that has no effect on morality. The choice in ME2 being "ZOMG INVALIDATED" because TIM gets Reaper tech another way doesn't change that you're still not the one who gave him the Reaper tech. It's a roleplaying choice. You may as well argue no choice in any of the games matter because the Reapers invade no matter what.

You give him the base? He uses it for evil. That's your decision backfiring.

You destroy the base? He gets Reaper tech a different way. Hardly backfiring or a penalty. No moreso than the Reapers invading no matter what.

And the Turian Counsilor SAYS at the end of ME1 that it was a Reaper. He shouldn't be reverting back to his old beliefs.


Why? Have you never watched a political debate? Politicans do it all the time. I'm surprised he didn't flipflop several times within the same conversation. The Turian Councilor in particular is an incredulous character. He was adversarial every step of the way, no matter how much proof you rubbed in his face, throughout ME1. He's just as adversarial toward Renegades, so it's not some backlash for being Paragon.

And really, saying something is BS means I'm "hysterical?"


Along with your other ridiculous exaggerations and theatrics including "HOW DARE YOU!? I'M LEAVING THIS THREAD!!!" when you don't have anything to back up your statements. Funny that you told me to "calm down" but I when I suggest maybe YOU should - what with your exaggerations and "outrage", you throw a hissy fit full of ad hominem. /eyeroll

And what is wrong with Big choice>little choices? Does that not make sense.


Except there's absolutely no penalties for being Paragon, especially with the big choices, as you've admitted. Renegades have to fight Rachni Husks in ME3. You're a hero if you save the colony of Feros.

Renegade choice for the final decision leads to no Council cameos, everyone hating you if you didn't save the Council (instead of being universally praised, like if you saved them) regardless of your motives - as you can choose to prioritize stopping Sovereign, and no Spectre status if you went with Udina (whereas you still get Spectre status with Udina if you save the Council). Even in the introduction, Cerberus will praise the decision to save the Council. What drawback is there to saving the Council exactly? How does it backfire?

What drawback is there to destroying the Collector base? How does it backfire? As a Paragon, you destroy the Collector base, get the last laugh as TIM loses his cool, know that you didn't foolishly shoot yourself in the foot, and every single person praises you - even characters who should be Renegade. As a Renegade, you stupidly are the one who causes most of the problems for yourself in ME3, TIM laughs at your naivety, and every single person - even the Renegades who told you to save the base - tell you how stupid and wrong you were. You practically get a "Game Over" screen for going Renegade.

It's also interesting that going as "Renegade" as possible in ME1 leads to... the universe you get if you haven't played the game before - which is lacking in content and nobody likes you, even though Renegades SHOULD have allies. By playing through as a Paragon, you get exclusive import content. If you're "pure Renegade"... you may as well not even bother importing.

The Collector Base "backfiring" would be if Renegades could make use of the technology in it to help stop the Reapers and Cerberus, whereas Paragons would be SOL.


As silly as you're acting here (your valid points are getting covered up by your overreacting), OP asked us to stop. Why don't we?

#96
Guest_Rojahar_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 06:19

Guest_Rojahar_*
  • Guests

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

As silly as you're acting here (your valid points are getting covered up by your overreacting), OP asked us to stop. Why don't we?


I'm sorry for... addressing the points of what things backfiring for paragons in ME3? Do you have something to add other than attacking me as usual? Like... about any of those points I brought up? If not, then maybe you should stop making an *ss of yourself, as usual. You've done nothing but ignore the topic and address me directly. If you don't have anything contructive to add, try not to post just to see yourself post.

HogarthHughes 3 wrote...

That whole "couldn't let you go"
bit along with the armor on display is just friggen weird when I play my
renegade character who barely talked to Liara outside of mandatory
debrief dialogue.  But it's just another problem with characters being
auto-buddies even when given other options in the previous game.
 Bioware really oughta just force Shepard to be nice, or not have
important story elements dependant on relationships that are subject to
change.


Shadow Broker would have been a lot more interesting IMO if there was dialog for if Liara hated you or you just
didn't get along or something, maybe a different motive for retrieving Shep, etc.

Modifié par Rojahar, 05 octobre 2011 - 06:22 .

#97
HogarthHughes 3
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 06:34

HogarthHughes 3
  • Members
  • 431 messages

Rojahar wrote...

Shadow Broker would have been a lot more interesting IMO if there was dialog for if Liara hated you or you just
didn't get along or something, maybe a different motive for retrieving Shep, etc.


Definitely, at least they gave us the option to keep things purely professional at the end (though Shepard doesn't get his/her tags back then for whatever reason).  I hope the Mass Effect team takes some tips from DA2 (which while not really a complete game has plenty of good qualities) and offer more dynamic relationships between characters.

#98
Sebby
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 06:35

Sebby
  • Members
  • 11 993 messages

Rojahar wrote...

It's also interesting that going as "Renegade" as possible in ME1 leads to... the universe you get if you haven't played the game before - which is lacking in content and nobody likes you, even though Renegades SHOULD have allies. By playing through as a Paragon, you get exclusive import content. If you're "pure Renegade"... you may as well not even bother importing.


That a race of ultra-violent man-turtles like the Krogan who love war,killing and mutiliation is considered a Paragon ally and not a Renegade one shows what a joke the system is. It's also nonsensical how a Renegade Shepard who killed the council, the Rachni and the Heretic Geth isn't able to build up her reputation to make allies with the "outlaw" non-citadel races like the Krogan,Quarians,etc. Instead we're forced down a purely humancentric path and we can't even have Cerberus to back us up.

Paragon is "winner takes all" without fear of alienating allies. She can spare the Rachni without pissing off the Krogan, empower the Geth without a word from the Quarians and be a stooge for the Council who has screwed over all these people without a care in the world.

#99
TurianRenegade
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 06:38

TurianRenegade
  • Members
  • 125 messages
I think leaving Miranda and/or Jacob alive in ME2 will cause them to have a crisis of conscience in ME3 since Cerberus has turned on Shepard and at some point they'll have to choose between killing Shepard, or turning their backs on the Illusive Man despite everything he's done for them.

#100
Guest_Rojahar_*
Posté 05 octobre 2011 - 06:41

Guest_Rojahar_*
  • Guests

HogarthHughes 3 wrote...

Rojahar wrote...

Shadow Broker would have been a lot more interesting IMO if there was dialog for if Liara hated you or you just
didn't get along or something, maybe a different motive for retrieving Shep, etc.


Definitely, at least they gave us the option to keep things purely professional at the end (though Shepard doesn't get his/her tags back then for whatever reason).


I like to think she kept them out of jealous spite. :P

I hope the Mass Effect team takes some tips from DA2 (which while not really a complete game has plenty of good qualities) and offer more dynamic relationships between characters.


Hopefully some of the loyalty mission outcomes can lead to something like that, where it's had a toll on the character's personalities. A renegade friendship path, and a paragon friendship path, could be interesting especially with influencing the characters. Samara is kind of like that, in that she says she'd normally kill you - if you're a Renegade. Would have been interesting if you could have persuaded Samara to see your side of things though, kind of like Paragons can with Zaeed a bit.

Seboist wrote...

That a race of ultra-violent man-turtles
like the Krogan who love war,killing and mutiliation is considered a
Paragon ally and not a Renegade one shows what a joke the system is.
It's also nonsensical how a Renegade Shepard who killed the council, the
Rachni and the Heretic Geth isn't able to build up her reputation to
make allies with the "outlaw" non-citadel races like the
Krogan,Quarians,etc. Instead we're forced down a purely humancentric
path and we can't even have Cerberus to back us up.

Paragon is
"winner takes all" without fear of alienating allies. She can spare the
Rachni without pissing off the Krogan, empower the Geth without a word
from the Quarians and be a stooge for the Council who has screwed over
all these people without a care in the world.


IMO, Mass Effect overall would be a much more interesting game if overall there were "Renegade allies" and
"Paragon allies" with people like Cerberus and the Krogan will support
and aid you against the Reapers for your Renegade choices. So far, and as far as we can tell for ME3, it looks like Paragon will always be winner-take-all, which IMO kind of defeats the point of choice. Tradeoffs would also make replays even more interesting, if having one ally would alienate another potential ally.

Modifié par Rojahar, 05 octobre 2011 - 06:46 .

Retourner dans General Discussion


  1. The BioWare Forum
  2. → Mass Effect
  3. → Mass Effect 3
  4. → General Discussion