366 réponses à ce sujet

[Someone With Mass]

D3MON-SOVER3IGN wrote...

Umm.. DUH..its the quarian and geth conflict..

I meant the one in ME2..Haestorms sun..

That's a spoiler, and I won't reveal it.

[Labrev]

DarthCaine wrote...

What I want is actual ingame consequences.

What I don't want is my choices summed up in some crappy epilogue/email text. What I don't want is just some minor dialogue changes. What I don't want is the major game choice only resulting in a different ending video. What I don't want is illusion. (and I've just described how BioWare handles consequences in ALL of the their games, they always give us tons of choices, but NO consequences of those choices)

What I want is at LEAST different quests. What I want is just a fraction of what The Witcher 2 did (changing 1/3 of the game with a single choice). What I want is different party members based on your choices like in KOTOR 2 (and not getting them in the last hour of the game like in DAO with Loghain/Alistair, or Bethany/Carver getting removed right after 1/4 of the game, or how in ME3 the VS leaves right after the first mission)

I can't fathom what makes people believe that the countless variables through two seperate games can be accomodated with entire QUESTS of their own within the space of two CD's. Unless they'd be OK with getting the game over four CD's with a $120 price tag.

People who ever had these kinds of expectations were kidding themselves. Any other game that may have allowed it in theirs probably didn't have half as complex a story behind it (in a triology, no less) or half as many variables as the ME series does.

[Someone With Mass]

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

I can't fathom what makes people believe that the countless variables through two seperate games can be accomodated with entire QUESTS of their own within the space of two CD's. Unless they'd be OK with getting the game over four CD's with a $120 price tag.

People who ever had these kinds of expectations were kidding themselves. Any other game that may have allowed it in theirs probably didn't have half as complex a story behind it (in a triology, no less) or half as many variables as the ME series does.

In before the whiners complaining about how ME2's story sucked, even if the characters were the clear focus.

[Labrev]

Bad King wrote...

I wouldn't be surprised! The outcome that makes me facepalm the most atm is the outcome in ME3 if you killed Balak (and I'm someone who originally let him escape).

That's not what I read. I'm not sure where people have come up with the supposed positive outcome behind letting Balak go. Even if there is one, I fail to see how any of my Sheps are "screwed" for it as the rene-whiners want to insist.

[Bad King]

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

Bad King wrote...

I wouldn't be surprised! The outcome that makes me facepalm the most atm is the outcome in ME3 if you killed Balak (and I'm someone who originally let him escape).

That's not what I read. I'm not sure where people have come up with the supposed positive outcome behind letting Balak go. Even if there is one, I fail to see how any of my Sheps are "screwed" for it as the rene-whiners want to insist.

It is bad if you killed him, though I won't discuss the spoiler here. On top of that, what happens in ME3 if he dies in ME1 is very implausible and rather silly. So even if you don't consider it to be a bad outcome (which I do), it is still a pretty dumb outcome.

[DarthCaine]

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

What I want is actual ingame consequences.

What I don't want is my choices summed up in some crappy epilogue/email text. What I don't want is just some minor dialogue changes. What I don't want is the major game choice only resulting in a different ending video. What I don't want is illusion. (and I've just described how BioWare handles consequences in ALL of the their games, they always give us tons of choices, but NO consequences of those choices)

What I want is at LEAST different quests. What I want is just a fraction of what The Witcher 2 did (changing 1/3 of the game with a single choice). What I want is different party members based on your choices like in KOTOR 2 (and not getting them in the last hour of the game like in DAO with Loghain/Alistair, or Bethany/Carver getting removed right after 1/4 of the game, or how in ME3 the VS leaves right after the first mission)

I can't fathom what makes people believe that the countless variables through two seperate games can be accomodated with entire QUESTS of their own within the space of two CD's. Unless they'd be OK with getting the game over four CD's with a $120 price tag.

People who ever had these kinds of expectations were kidding themselves. Any other game that may have allowed it in theirs probably didn't have half as complex a story behind it (in a triology, no less) or half as many variables as the ME series does.

I didn't mean two compeletely different main quests. Just the occasional different quest will do. Heck even GTA4 and Saints Row had different missions depending on your choice.

And I never said anything about choices transfered to the next game (which if you look at the save editor, there aren't that many). I'm talking about ANY choice in ANY BioWare game. The most consequence any of them have in a minorly different ending cutscene, a different dialogue line, or just some crappy text.

One single choice from The Witcher 2 resulted in COMPLETELY different ACTs with COMPLETELY different quests, each having different choices resulting in more different outcomes.
KOTOR 2 had 4 completely different full party members, which all depended on which choices you made.
Every single one of Alpha Protocol's choices effects were reminded to you throughout the whole game.
In Skyrim there were 2 completely different questlines depending on whether you sided with the rebels or the empire.

And The Witcher 2's story (and Alpha Protocol's) have 10 more complexity that "AHHH EVIL GENERIC CLICHE CTHULHU MONSTERS ARE COMING TO KILL US, LET'S DESTROY THEM SIMPLY IN THE LAST MINUTE WITH A DEUS EX MACHIMA"

Modifié par DarthCaine, 19 décembre 2011 - 03:54 .

[Labrev]

Bad King wrote...

It is bad if you killed him, though I won't discuss the spoiler here. On top of that, what happens in ME3 if he dies in ME1 is very implausible and rather silly. So even if you don't consider it to be a bad outcome (which I do), it is still a pretty dumb outcome.

All I've read is a "you should have killed me when you had the chance" type confrontation towards Shepard.

@DarthCaine - can't comment further, I haven't played the games. That said, I'd need a lot of convincing that they are comparable in the scope of gameplay/sub-plots/story-arcs/major-characters/minor-characters. What little I've seen of two of those games are design and gameplay that alone are clearly not on ME's level.

[Destroy Raiden_]

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.

This and I've also noticed the ren interrupts are more jerk then strategic. Rens shouldn't equal win either because being a cold calculating commander will only serve to make your allies turn on you when they think you've become to ambitious or threaten their security. There is a reason why Kim Jong Il, and the like end up alone and hated by everyone and have lots of people close to them who want to kill them.

Playing as Paragades and Renagons should be the way to get the best ending possible full Rens and full paras should get bitter sweet - bad endings.

[didymos1120]

Destroy Raiden wrote...

This and I've also noticed the ren interrupts are more jerk then strategic.

Which ones exactly? Other than punching Al-Jilani again, of course.

[AVPen]

didymos1120 wrote...

Destroy Raiden wrote...

This and I've also noticed the ren interrupts are more jerk then strategic.

Which ones exactly? Other than punching Al-Jilani again, of course.

Beating the s*** outta Mouse comes to mind. 

[didymos1120]

AVPen wrote...

Beating the s*** outta Mouse comes to mind. 

Not really, because the motivation is to get the info Thane needs because time is short. No, it's not nice, but neither is it mean for the sake of mean. Shep can even apologize afterwards, if you so choose.  And you can't bring in the fact that the other approaches will also succeed.  You know that.  Shep does not.

[Someone With Mass]

Hah Yes Reapers wrote...

Bad King wrote...

I wouldn't be surprised! The outcome that makes me facepalm the most atm is the outcome in ME3 if you killed Balak (and I'm someone who originally let him escape).

That's not what I read. I'm not sure where people have come up with the supposed positive outcome behind letting Balak go. Even if there is one, I fail to see how any of my Sheps are "screwed" for it as the rene-whiners want to insist.

Yeah, whoever thought that Balak is going to help Shepard in any way is just full of themselves.

[Someone With Mass]

AVPen wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Destroy Raiden wrote...

This and I've also noticed the ren interrupts are more jerk then strategic.

Which ones exactly? Other than punching Al-Jilani again, of course.

Beating the s*** outta Mouse comes to mind. 

Or the one where you punch the crap out of that delivery boy or whatever he is on Thane's loyalty mission.

[AVPen]

didymos1120 wrote...

AVPen wrote...

Beating the s*** outta Mouse comes to mind. 

Not really, because the motivation is to get the info Thane needs because time is short. No, it's not nice, but neither is it mean for the sake of mean. Shep can even apologize afterwards, if you so choose.  And you can't bring in the fact that the other approaches will also succeed.  You know that.  Shep does not.

Perhaps so, although just like the Al-Jilani choice, neither the player or Shepard will even be aware that other choices of handling the situation exist if he/she just automatically react to the big flashing, shiny red "Intimidate" button and go wacking non-combatant/civilan people in the head all the time. 

(and for the record, no, I was not gonna bring in the whole "metagaming" angle that people seem to b**** about lately)

Modifié par AVPen, 19 décembre 2011 - 04:31 .

[LucidStrike]

Arcian wrote...

This thread will inevitably lead to a Cerberus/Renegade circlejerking circus.

Also, this is a story, not a thought experiement. It is not implausible that, IN CONTEXT, the paragon choices DO tend to be the better choices. Perfectly plausible. It's just a snapshot in time, and the universe is not obligated to keep score and balance these things out at all times...or ever.

That said, for the sake of gameplay and choice, I would hope there would be pros and cons to it all overall.

Modifié par LucidStrike, 19 décembre 2011 - 04:38 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

BellaStrega wrote...
Actually, mentally unstable people - mentally ill people - are significantly more likely to be victims of violence than instigators of it. You punched him out? You simply reinforced the statistics. Such a reaction may be rationalized by Shepard after doing it, but it's a pretty ignorant move.

Actually, all serial killers etc. are mentally unstable people.  The kids that shoot up a school are also mentally unstable people (atleast by that point).  Nero, who burned Rome, was also mentally unstable.  If they're going "off" and saying "my voice must be heard!" you know something will eventually boil over.

As a soldier seeing people start losing it, sedating them is the best thing to do... Shepard apparently didn't have any sedatives on hand... but it was hardly ignorant.  He gave a decent justification (he didn't kill the guy, he just didn't want to risk him doing something crazy and not be around to stop it... because he wouldn't be).

For the record, I never punch him.

That became socially acceptable because Shepard punched her. What do you do when the press asks uncomfortable questions? Punch the reporter out? There's something wrong with this approach.

I highly doubt that.  I think she just gets punched a lot because of what she does as a news reporter.  It's a running gag of the series.  I don't agree with it, but from the ME universe's perspective... Shepard's not doing something out-of-the-ordinary.

For the record, I never punch the reporter.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

AVPen wrote...

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Punching the Reporter:  Practically everyone we've seen that she interviews has hit her.  In that universe, doing that to her had become socially acceptable for some reason.  Regardless, a Renegade Shepard could be well aware of that.

I'm sorry, but that analogy is more or less the same as saying "If everyone jumped off a bridge, would you do it too?" 

Although I suppose the Mass Effect equivalent of that saying would be, "If everyone drank a 10 quarts of Rynchol, would you do it too?" 

It's not the same (totally different world)... jumping off a bridge is typically associated with cause of death.  Here, they just punch the reporter and move on.  Same for drinking 10 quarts of Rynchol... in the Mass Effect world, both are harmless... including the assaults that the Reporter receives (she always gets up, cusses and vows to make sure everyone sees it).

[Youknow]

Some of them should. I was disappointed when we really didn't get to more results from the "dead" council. The only thing that ended up happening was that non-human vendors were jerks. Which I don't really understand. I'd be more happy to be alive than I would the person that didn't save my leader. I wish there would have been more talk about the arms race turians and humans were apparently having.

[Mr. Gogeta34]

jreezy wrote...

JamieCOTC wrote...

jreezy wrote...

If renegade choices still result in saving the galaxy I consider that a job well done.

Ultimately, I think BW wrote themselves into a corner and oversold the “choices matter.” Yeah, choices matter.  Renegades probably won’t see Conrad Verner. As to which path is right, paragon or renegade, I’ve played both and everything in between.  Ultimately, it’s up to the individual player.  Do I wish that my renegade could join Cerberus in ME3 and establish human dominance? Yes.  Do I wish my Paragon could write the Reapers a strongly worded letter?  Actually, that would be pretty funny, but no.
 
Anyway as a default ME2 game was basically a full renegade run, this might make renegades a little less bitter.
http://twitter.com/#...441339389329408

As of right now yeah they definitely oversold the choices matter. That tweet is promising though.

Not to me... they shouldn't have lumped Renegade and Neutral choices together with "new players" to begin with.  It only serves to make non-paragon choices more pointless (as they end up saying "Would a new guy understand it?  If not, then just cut that content and come up with a hard-to-believe excuse for why it's not there.  But keep that Paragon content coming in exclusive and fresh)... just sayin'

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 19 décembre 2011 - 05:41 .

[Mr. Gogeta34]

Youknow wrote...

Some of them should. I was disappointed when we really didn't get to more results from the "dead" council. The only thing that ended up happening was that non-human vendors were jerks. Which I don't really understand. I'd be more happy to be alive than I would the person that didn't save my leader. I wish there would have been more talk about the arms race turians and humans were apparently having.

It doesn't make any sense... 

Commander Shepard... the first human Spectre... Hero of the Battle at the Citadel... is back from the dead with highly distrubing rumors regarding ties with an avowed enemy of the Council (capital-offense stuff).

He comes over into Citadel space to provide the answers and clear the air.. and the all-human Council (Human-led if you were Neutral... where's the leadership?).... avoids this person?  Yet alone the fact that Spectres only answer to the Council...


From what I can tell, we didn't get to see the new Council because that choice was lumped together with the profile of "new players" and seeing them wouldn't make a difference to players who've never played the game before.

Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 19 décembre 2011 - 05:54 .

[Cuddlezarro]

Youknow wrote...

Some of them should. I was disappointed when we really didn't get to more results from the "dead" council. The only thing that ended up happening was that non-human vendors were jerks. Which I don't really understand. I'd be more happy to be alive than I would the person that didn't save my leader. I wish there would have been more talk about the arms race turians and humans were apparently having.

actually only the turian arms dealer is a jerk to you if you kill the council

the salarian tech guy is a fanboy of you reguardless and the asari are neutral to you

Modifié par Cuddlezarro, 19 décembre 2011 - 05:47 .

[AVPen]

Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...

Youknow wrote...

Some of them should. I was disappointed when we really didn't get to more results from the "dead" council. The only thing that ended up happening was that non-human vendors were jerks. Which I don't really understand. I'd be more happy to be alive than I would the person that didn't save my leader. I wish there would have been more talk about the arms race turians and humans were apparently having.

Commander Shepard... the first human Spectre... Hero of the Battle at the Citadel... is back from the dead with highly distrubing rumors regarding ties with an avowed enemy of the Council (capital-offense stuff).

He comes over into Citadel space to provide the answers and clear the air.. and the all-human Council (Human-led if you were Neutral... where's the leadership?).... avoids this person?  Yet alone the fact that Spectres only answer to the Council...

I honestly don't know why people are so damn shocked that the Human/Human-led Council refused to see Shepard and wanted nothing to do with him, given the fact that the Alliance itself disavowed Shepard and everything he said and did regarding the Reapers after he dies and that was far before the Cerberus rumors came about....

Modifié par AVPen, 19 décembre 2011 - 06:01 .

[Someone With Mass]

AVPen wrote...

I honestly don't know why people are so damn shocked that the Human/Human-led Council refused to see Shepard and wanted nothing to do with him, given the fact that the Alliance itself disavowed Shepard and everything he said and did regarding the Reapers after he dies and that was far before the Cerberus rumors came about....

Not ot mention that they might have better things to do than to tell Shepard how much of a tool they think he is.