366 réponses à ce sujet

[InvincibleHero]

GHNR wrote...

I would have to disagree with the OP's assessment. Various Renegade choices in both games would actually hamper the war against the Reapers, like depriving yourself of a powerful ally by killing the Rachni Queen, killing Wrex (shame on any Renegade who did that), destroying the Genophage data and depriving the chance for the Krogan to boost there numbers, killing the Council making the rest of the species distrustful of Shepard and the Alliance, letting Morinth live, because you know....letting a serial killer roam free is a great idea, and destroying Heretic Station which would still allow pockets of Heretic Geth to regroup and create a second vrius to indoctrinate the mainstream Geth.

All in all, my Renegade is moreso a Renegon, because he isn't stupid enough to allow a chance to stop the Reapers die.

Past doesn't matter I didn't intent for a rehash on past decisions. I too think it stupid to kill Wrex it should not be renegade because his loss decreases operational efficency. Other than they throw if its renegade it must be evil in there despite saying no no it is not good vs the evil.

What is the difference between Morinth and Jack. I say Jack is worse yet paragons have no problem letting her roam free. Morinth kills becasue of her genetics and Jack killed because could and she wanted to period. Grunt professes to wanting to kill all turians so we should add him in there too.

[Dean_the_Young]

Han Shot First wrote...

Here is the problem with a pure Renegade playthrough:

Shepard has worked for human dominance at the expense of the other great civilizations of the galaxy. .

Bar two key flaws.

While the (ME1) Renegade rhetoric was slanted towards Human-nationalism, it was not at the expense of everyone else.

And the Renegade choices have never had a consistent theme of Human nationalism at the expense of all others. Out of all the choices, only three Big Decisions could possibly fit that role... and all have more pressing common threats that endanger the entire galaxy. The Council decision in ME1, when the Reapers will arrive if you don't beat Sovereign quickly enough. The Base decision in ME2, except that again we're dealing with a common threat, and the worse we do against it the worse off everyone is. And Project Overlord, except the Geth are (rightfully) visible as a threat to everyone.



And that's it. In ME1, the Rachni question is in line with 'galactic common good' when you kill her. Feros sees a Renegade wipe out a Human colony. None of the side quests are pro-human at the expense of all other species.

In ME2, Renegade Shepard even becomes the supporter of the Salarians and the genophage. Most decisions have no Human vs. others aspect at all. One of the few that does, the anti-human politician on Thane's loyalty mission, is not only racist but corrupt.

[Yezdigerd]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Everything indicates Manuel will stay quiet?  Last thing he stated (and with an elevated voice I might add) is "my voice must be heard!" Hardly the declaration of someone who'd stay quiet.

Yeah, and the leap from that to "I will scream the Geth down on us, no matter what" is just not there. Manuel isn't even shouting and we know Manuel was able to stay quiet before, so there is no reason to assume he wouldn't again. And if Shepard was concerned, at the very least adressing the doctor on the issue would be the obvious course of action. The fact that renegade Shepard whacks him out of nowhere just illustrates how absurd the action is.

The doctor also understood why Shepard did what he did after Shep explained himself and even supposed that he was right.  Manuel could've done any number of things stupid or dangerous if he continued on with his ranting and raving.

-what did you do! -
"oh my god you can't just go around whacking people in the head!".
-it was only matter of time before he did something crazy or dangerous,
-I suppose you are right

Sure we can invent all kind of absurd justifications for Shepards actions, but the clincher is what Shepard says. It's not "I'm sorry Manuel but you leave me no choice"  It's "Say good night Manuel".
The Game designers require you to mock him, why brutalizing him, so there shall be no doubt whatsoever that the action is unequivocally evil.
Since you can string sentences to together, you understand this. So the only reason to defend this is because it gives some pleasure being contrarian.

And for the reporter, that's Mass Effect's universe dude... not this one... and certainly not "mine" (whatever that means).  Everyone hits that reporter... the Shadowbroker's been keeping a tab on some of them.  Watch it yourself if you ever get the Shadowbroker DLC (I assume you're just not aware).

You miss the point. If Britney Spears assaults a reporter she gets a fine, community service. If the commander of Seal team six does it, he will be looking for another job.

If you think that's childish, then blame Bioware.... they're the ones who made it a running gag of the series (along with Conrad Verner).

I am blaming Bioware. I find it silly that the game allows you to summary execute people in the middle of the Citadel Market without consequences. I would very much appreciate credible renegade decisions instead of the puerile nonsense that is served up.

[TMA LIVE]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

Here is the problem with a pure Renegade playthrough:

Shepard has worked for human dominance at the expense of the other great civilizations of the galaxy. .

Bar two key flaws.

While the (ME1) Renegade rhetoric was slanted towards Human-nationalism, it was not at the expense of everyone else.

And the Renegade choices have never had a consistent theme of Human nationalism at the expense of all others. Out of all the choices, only three Big Decisions could possibly fit that role... and all have more pressing common threats that endanger the entire galaxy. The Council decision in ME1, when the Reapers will arrive if you don't beat Sovereign quickly enough. The Base decision in ME2, except that again we're dealing with a common threat, and the worse we do against it the worse off everyone is. And Project Overlord, except the Geth are (rightfully) visible as a threat to everyone.



And that's it. In ME1, the Rachni question is in line with 'galactic common good' when you kill her. Feros sees a Renegade wipe out a Human colony. None of the side quests are pro-human at the expense of all other species.

In ME2, Renegade Shepard even becomes the supporter of the Salarians and the genophage. Most decisions have no Human vs. others aspect at all. One of the few that does, the anti-human politician on Thane's loyalty mission, is not only racist but corrupt.

I think that simply creates the problem of just playing pure paragon and pure renegade. From a writing stand point, I don't think it was designed to just blindly follow whatever down was. Or blindly follow whatever up was. Because by doing so, you'll create an inconsistent character. One minute Renegade Shepard is ****ing about TIM, and then in the next minute he's acting as if TIM is his buddy. Or from the Paragon side of things, Shepard goes from saying he doesn't trust Cerberus and being aggressive about it, to believing Cerberus didn't betray him and defending their actions.

Pure Paragon and Pure Renegade just weren't written to be played as default characters.

You're not suppose to follow a Good or Bad path laid out by Bioware. You're suppose to pick your own path based on how out want Shepard to act per situation.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 21 décembre 2011 - 03:41 .

[Yezdigerd]

Bleachrude wrote...

This thread has shown multiple times where going renegade nets you a quantifiable advantage but as yet, we havent seen the same with paragon choices...

Do players get more money for going paragon - well, no, reverse is actually true.
Do players get more stuff (techs, weapons) for going paragon - no.
Do players have an easier game while going paragon - again, reverse is actually true.
Do players if they choose paragon options actually get better results - Nope. In fact, given that paragon players get "turian councillor" AND are made a fool by that asari eclipse merc, the paragon option is actually worse than the renegade option in ME2.

Why do people keep insisting that paragon options are "better" when the game explicitly makes them not?

I think it's if you repeat it often enough it will become true.

[Viking Stoner]

I played pure paragon simply because i wanted to make everyone happy and wanted everyone to survive in Mass Effect 3. The system is totally broken, though. They give you renegade points for doing nothing renegady. They give you renegade points for shooting a robot (lol) but give you paragon points for punching Zaeed. There were many times i got paragon points for something that should have clearly been renegade. The system was all over the place, hopefully corrected in ME3.

[TMA LIVE]

Maybe that's a problem. You're assuming being "Good Guy" means "Do no wrong".

[Viking Stoner]

No, but if you're going to make something renegade make sure Shepard doesn't do anything worse than that option later on and gain paragon points. Otherwise it just makes the system useless and Shepard bipolar. There were times you'd get renegade points simply by choosing the left option and asking people to explain themselves. There is absolutely nothing "evil" about asking someone to explain themselves. Other times you'd get Renegade points for your opinion on matters even if you were arguing against the worst off opinion. That makes the Karma system not just restricted to Bad/Good actions but your opinion on matters as well? Basicaly disagree with people = Evil person. Ultimately the game punishes you if you want to be a Paragon as you will be forced to miss out on various conversations simply because it will give you renegade points for them. It was a horrible implementation of a karma system, one of the most unbalanced ive played, and they need to fix it.

Modifié par Viking Stoner, 21 décembre 2011 - 03:54 .

[TMA LIVE]

As I said, you're viewing it as a karma system. I don't think it was meant to be seem like that from a dialogue point of view.

You're not evil for being renegade. You're just an ****, or angry.

You're not good for being paragon. You're just more idealistic, or nice.

Either way, both do illegal things just to achieve a certain outcome. Or not nice things because you're taking a moral stand.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 21 décembre 2011 - 04:00 .

[TMA LIVE]

Let me put it this way.

Supporting Garrus getting revenge, and ditching Garrus at the elevator are classified as renegade paths. However, that's all they are. Paths. They aren't apart of "a" single path. They're simply different paths under a classified alignment. Or they're only put on the same path if you create it yourself. But it's really all up to you. It's not up to Bioware. They aren't writing renegade Shepard as one consistent character, and that you must follow the "renegade" path in order to be "the" renegade character. They're simply writing paths, and putting them under the alignments that fit the best.

The system is more designed to show you how you're becoming more renegade then paragon. And to reward you for being more Renegade then paragon, by unlocking charm options. But again, they're just options.

I've played both a renegon and paragade. And I honestly think that's how the game was really meant to be played.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 21 décembre 2011 - 04:59 .

[Lumikki]

I don't support the idea, because in real life renegade person would be in prison. It gives people wrong impression what's right and wrong, if we start supporting renegade action as been better than paragon. I support more like equal war effort paths, because this is game and not real life.

Modifié par Lumikki, 21 décembre 2011 - 06:02 .

[Shepard the Leper]

Lumikki wrote...

I don't support the idea, because in real life renegade person would be in prison. It gives people wrong impression what's right and wrong, if we start supporting renegade action as been better than paragon. I support more like equal war effort paths, because this is game and not real life.

Regardless which path you chose, Shepard has broken many laws and he has to explain him/herself in court of law at the start of ME3. I don't see your point.

Furthermore, those who play by the rules usually lose and those that cheat, conspire, bribe, intimidate etc usually win (in RL, not Hollywood movies). Shepard's objective has nothing to do with any such nonsense, it's about survival and in that case everything is justified. Besides, if everything goes wrong there will be no one left to reprimand Shepard anyway.

Bottomline, those who play to win disregarding rules, morals or whatnot have a far better chance to succeed than those who play by the book. Therefore Renegades should always have a better chance (or an easier time) to defeat the enemy. But I doubt that will be so in ME3 - it's worth mentioning though.

[Saber Wolf]

Lumikki wrote...

I don't support the idea, because in real life renegade person would be in prison. It gives people wrong impression what's right and wrong, if we start supporting renegade action as been better than paragon. I support more like equal war effort paths, because this is game and not real life.

Yeah, I agree on this.

[TMA LIVE]

I wouldn't say renegades have a better chance then paragons.

If you follow the renegade path, many choices are made because "It gets the job done". Without a care for future side effects.

Many Paragon choices are similar. Except instead of "getting the job done", it's "what makes people happy now". Without a care for future side effects

A better outcome would simply involve a more neutral setup.

Modifié par TMA LIVE, 21 décembre 2011 - 06:27 .

[Dave of Canada]

TMA LIVE wrote...

Many Paragon choices are similar. Except instead of "getting the job done", it's "what makes people happy now". Without a care for future side effects

The problem is, it does both.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

I Renegade would be just like Adama did in BSG, he left the colonial ships behind rather than potentially lose all to the cylons.

 

Adama never wanted to leave the 12 Colonies, and he was ordered by President Roslin to leave the 12 Colonies behind, and she was the one that ordered a group ships to left behind and Admiral Cain did the same thing.  

[Killjoy Cutter]

TMA LIVE wrote...

I wouldn't say renegades have a better chance then paragons.

If you follow the renegade path, many choices are made because "It gets the job done". Without a care for future side effects.

Many Paragon choices are similar. Except instead of "getting the job done", it's "what makes people happy now". Without a care for future side effects

A better outcome would simply involve a more neutral setup.

Whereas what I'm looking for is "what gets the job done without gratuiitous carnage or antagonization". 

About every other renegade choice in ME2 is blatantly gratuitous in its negative effects.

[didymos1120]

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

Adama never wanted to leave the 12 Colonies, and he was ordered by President Roslin to leave the 12 Colonies behind, and she was the one that ordered a group ships to left behind and Admiral Cain did the same thing.  

Sure, she tried to order him.  He also ignored her.  He later decided on his own that she was right.  Also, no, Cain didn't do the same thing.  Cain ordered those ships stripped for parts and for useful personnel, and also ordered that summary executions be performed on the families of any who resisted.  Just a tad bit of difference there.

[Mr Fixit]

didymos1120 wrote...

Cyberstrike nTo wrote...

Adama never wanted to leave the 12 Colonies, and he was ordered by President Roslin to leave the 12 Colonies behind, and she was the one that ordered a group ships to left behind and Admiral Cain did the same thing.  

Sure, she tried to order him.  He also ignored her.  He later decided on his own that she was right.  Also, no, Cain didn't do the same thing.  Cain ordered those ships stripped for parts and for useful personnel, and also ordered that summary executions be performed on the families of any who resisted.  Just a tad bit of difference there.

Oh, how I love that show

Carry on, please!

[Lumikki]

Shepard the Leper wrote...

Lumikki wrote...

I don't support the idea, because in real life renegade person would be in prison. It gives people wrong impression what's right and wrong, if we start supporting renegade action as been better than paragon. I support more like equal war effort paths, because this is game and not real life.

Regardless which path you chose, Shepard has broken many laws and he has to explain him/herself in court of law at the start of ME3. I don't see your point.

I readed you comment and I can understand why you don't see my point. No worries, it's not big deal.

Furthermore, those who play by the rules usually lose and those that cheat, conspire, bribe, intimidate etc usually win (in RL, not Hollywood movies). Shepard's objective has nothing to do with any such nonsense, it's about survival and in that case everything is justified. Besides, if everything goes wrong there will be no one left to reprimand Shepard anyway.

Bottomline, those who play to win disregarding rules, morals or whatnot have a far better chance to succeed than those who play by the book. Therefore Renegades should always have a better chance (or an easier time) to defeat the enemy. But I doubt that will be so in ME3 - it's worth mentioning though.

It's not just about winning, it's also about how you win.  Point been, what you do, often also defines what you are. Not just as personal level, but hole society level. I ques you could say it's choice how you want something to be done, not just that it will be done.

Both paragon and renegade gets the job done, but the different is how it's done. Favoring one isn't any good in ME serie, because we all should be allowed to play roles we have choosen. Point been, player liking sertain role should not be reason to favor it, because we all can play different kind of roles. So, in ME serie we all should have equal possibilities to play any Shepard role we have choosen, in our war efforts.

Modifié par Lumikki, 21 décembre 2011 - 09:03 .

[InvincibleHero]

Ryuzetsu wrote...

Nothing about paragon IMO is easy. Sure a renegade can make sacrifices, but a lot of those times it doesn't hurt the renegade themselves. Paragons usually have to take on sacrifices that deny themselves, happiness, comfort, wealth, health. This to my mind is the harder choice, because you have to comprise yourself and strive for diplomatic solutions.

I think some examples are in order. Sure they miss out on a whole 2000 credits by not allowing the batarian to die. In ME2 that isn't  a make or break amount at all. I missed 2 or 3 mods in the 50,000 to 75,000 range even with a max rich Shep import so yeah meaningless.

Where do they sacrifice happiness more than renegades? They get to feel good letting people go instead of being a grim resolute executioner for nameless victims they get to claim they saved a race from extinction that turns out to be benevolent.

Comfort? That is from left field as there is no such difference in accomodations in the game same ship same chance to buy anything with credits. If you mean on moral stance the paragon is written more stably than renegade and is constent as in you are a good person.

Health? What? Does your paragon Shepard have less health? Oh you mean not taking battle interrupts that can help simply because you cannot abide a few red points. Yeah that affects you the whole six seconds of hugging cover. Yeah that's going to leave an emotional scar for sure.

[InvincibleHero]

Calinstel wrote...

Saving the Council, knowing it will most likely cause the death of many humans.  Easy choice would be to just wait.
Freeing the rachni, knowing that in the future, history may repeat itself.  Easy choice would be to kill it with fire!
Just a couple that come to mind.

You get to be the hero charging to the rescue as paragon. It ends up to be a net saving of lives as well. Sure a minor amount of humans die.

Waiting is the same as the option let them burn as far as the galaxy is concerned as you get the blame and hate of aliens as well. It is not the easy thing. As you live with the loss of the DA when you could have stopped it.

It is not the easy choice to liquadate the rachni queen. It is the prudent choice, but you are accused of genocide by the council. Besides Shepard and two companions cleared infestations by themselves on planet after planet. The game illustrates them as a threat quite poorly.

Letting her go is easy because there is no survivor's guilt. Since the queen is sentient and promises good behavior it leaves para-Shep's conscuience as clean even if it turns out poorly. See how BW did that?

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Yezdigerd wrote...
Yeah, and the leap from that to "I will scream the Geth down on us, no matter what" is just not there. Manuel isn't even shouting and we know Manuel was able to stay quiet before, so there is no reason to assume he wouldn't again. And if Shepard was concerned, at the very least adressing the doctor on the issue would be the obvious course of action. The fact that renegade Shepard whacks him out of nowhere just illustrates how absurd the action is.

Who said anything about the Geth?  The past ("before") doesn't matter... the present situation was that he's getting "worse," just like anyone that slowly "loses it."  They're always "okay before."  To make matters worse, he was acting the way he was while already on his medicine (medicine he was taking for being "mad") and even received an extra dosage.  Like Kaiden stated, it was a bit extreme, but the logic was to prevent him from doing something stupid or dangerous... that's something Shepard would be unable to do once he left them there.

Extreme?  Sure... but hardly absurd.  Play Dead Space 2... see what Nolan Stross does after a while, then give me your same answer of "Nolan was able to stay quiet/harmless before, so there is no reason to assume he wouldn't be again." 

Heck, in Batman: Arkham Asylum... the Joker surrendered to Batman "without a fight..." so per your logic, there's no reason in the world Joker wouldn't be submissive once he got in?
You don't seem to understand how mentally unstable people are.  Look into it.  

-what did you do! -
"oh my god you can't just go around whacking people in the head!".
-it was only matter of time before he did something crazy or dangerous,
-I suppose you are right

Sure we can invent all kind of absurd justifications for Shepards actions, but the clincher is what Shepard says. It's not "I'm sorry Manuel but you leave me no choice"  It's "Say good night Manuel".
The Game designers require you to mock him, why brutalizing him, so there shall be no doubt whatsoever that the action is unequivocally evil.
Since you can string sentences to together, you understand this. So the only reason to defend this is because it gives some pleasure being contrarian.

Not absurd... the doctor agreed with Shepard.  She didn't say "no no, he'd neeevarrr do something like that!"  After the initial shock of seeing Shepard punch the man, she realized it made sense.

You miss the point. If Britney Spears assaults a reporter she gets a fine, community service. If the commander of Seal team six does it, he will be looking for another job.

I didn't miss it, you're just not understanding it.  In the Mass Effect universe... Britney Spears doesn't get anything for doing it.  The Commander of Seal Team 6 doesn't get anything either.  They all did it and nothing happens, that's how the ME games have been.  It's a slapstick gag/funny/anti-paparazzi event.

I am blaming Bioware. I find it silly that the game allows you to summary execute people in the middle of the Citadel Market without consequences. I would very much appreciate credible renegade decisions instead of the puerile nonsense that is served up.

Spectres have a license to kill and answer only to the Council.  They could kill someone in the middle of church and it wouldn't matter.  They're not touchable.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 23 décembre 2011 - 05:09 .

[InvincibleHero]

Bleachrude wrote...

But renegade doesn't net you any disadvantages either so I don't think renegade is presented as the wrong choice either...

Is ANY part of the game harder if you take either paragon or renegade path? To my knowledge there's no quantifiable difference so renegade is never really the "wrong" choice IMO.

So being chastisted by council and Hackett ( thinks you're the perfect murderer) and hated by aliens is no consequence. You are a reviled man sure there are some perks like some fear at Shep's rep, but doesn't come off as the big g...mn hero (to quote Zaeed) and get the love and adulation of everyone.

It cost a minor amount of exp and credits from Parasini's mission since she was quite dead for my one and only mostly ren playthrough (still had 2 bars para though).

The text and speech of the game illustrate it as the wrong choice which BW undermined the concept from the beginning by saying they would make it as valid and not as the evil path.

[LucidStrike]

TMA LIVE wrote...

As I said, you're viewing it as a karma system. I don't think it was meant to be seem like that from a dialogue point of view.

You're not evil for being renegade. You're just an ****, or angry.

You're not good for being paragon. You're just more idealistic, or nice.

Either way, both do illegal things just to achieve a certain outcome. Or not nice things because you're taking a moral stand.

Also, Sheperd's a theiving, murdering space fed any way you slice it. =/

Modifié par LucidStrike, 23 décembre 2011 - 05:10 .