I've seen and read both sides of the argument. some think paragons should have all the negative effects, while others think renegades. However in reality neither side should always get the negative effects from their actions. i believe bad outcomes should accompany decisions where they are applicable.
Say some situations require diplomacy, yet youre a die hard renegade, well obviously thats not the way to go so you would get some sort of consequence. same thing goes for paragons if they were put in a situation that required a sacrifice or betrayal.
This could also open an option for paragade or renegon players to get the perfect ending without having to rack up the morality points. if a person is observant enough to know which option will have the least consequences they could end the war with the least casualties/most saved worlds/ etc. of course im assuming thats how the war would play out, but you never know.
opinions?
Renegades and Paragons should have equal consequences.
Débuté par
SarunasAndSoOn
, déc. 19 2011 05:06
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 05:20
silentspec111
-
- Members
- 261 messages
I agree, people having pure paragon or renegade routes should have a mix of negative and positive effects. While on the other hand, players choosing the "correct/logical/observant" choices irrespective of paragon or renegade ones should get the perfect ending. But i doubt that is going to be a route BIOWARE is going to take 
#3
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 05:20
Mr. Gogeta34
-
- Members
- 4 033 messages
Agreed.
The way I look at it is... "Why have choices if you already know which answer provides the best results before you're even given that choice?" Outcomes aren't dependent on the story's circumstances or odds and have all revolved around the Paragon decisions and their glowing outcomes.
It makes the decision aspect of the series a bit stale... and changes the point of making decisions.
Sometimes Jack Bauer gets the best results even though there's morally ambiguous means of attaining that result. Other times, Ghandi gets the best results as he's a man that sticks to his ideals of non-aggression and non-violence etc.
Neither side should be "Favored."
The way I look at it is... "Why have choices if you already know which answer provides the best results before you're even given that choice?" Outcomes aren't dependent on the story's circumstances or odds and have all revolved around the Paragon decisions and their glowing outcomes.
It makes the decision aspect of the series a bit stale... and changes the point of making decisions.
Sometimes Jack Bauer gets the best results even though there's morally ambiguous means of attaining that result. Other times, Ghandi gets the best results as he's a man that sticks to his ideals of non-aggression and non-violence etc.
Neither side should be "Favored."
Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 19 décembre 2011 - 05:21 .
#4
Guest_Calinstel_*
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 05:21
Guest_Calinstel_*
Guest_Calinstel_*
-
- Guests
They do have consequences. They have all these threads to remind them how much the one dislikes the others choices.
#5
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 05:27
SarunasAndSoOn
-
- Members
- 287 messages
Calinstel wrote...
They do have consequences. They have all these threads to remind them how much the one dislikes the others choices.
i realize they do, i just dont want that fact to get lost amidst these one sided threads.
#6
Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 05:28
Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
Guest_EternalAmbiguity_*
-
- Guests
I'm popping in to say:
Yes, i agree.
Cheers, all.
Yes, i agree.
Cheers, all.
#7
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 05:37
GodWood
-
- Members
- 7 954 messages
It's a nice thought, and it is pretty much what I've been asking for all along (some P choices fail, some R choices fail, and some choices, P or R, have both positive and negative consequences)
Unfortunately however, after reading the spoilers it's clear that's not the case. Instead the ME3 plot feels like it has been written by some trolly paragon with a clear anti-renegade/Cerberus agenda.
It's seriously quite amazing how ridiculous it is.
Unfortunately however, after reading the spoilers it's clear that's not the case. Instead the ME3 plot feels like it has been written by some trolly paragon with a clear anti-renegade/Cerberus agenda.
It's seriously quite amazing how ridiculous it is.
#8
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 05:41
silentspec111
-
- Members
- 261 messages
The problem with ME1/ME2 so far has been that the paragon choices always gave you positive effects, while it seems the pure renegades get punished for their choices. Dont get me wrong im a pure paragon player myself, but a little mixture of the outcomes for the paragon/renegades can make this game so much better.
I love the Witcher 2 for that very reason. The dilemma you faced while making a decision not knowing which ones are going to come back and haunt you in the end.
@Mr. Gogeta34: I never thought I would ever see Jact Bauer and Ghandi in the same sentence and have that sentence make sense ...u sir, now have my utmost respect
I love the Witcher 2 for that very reason. The dilemma you faced while making a decision not knowing which ones are going to come back and haunt you in the end.
@Mr. Gogeta34: I never thought I would ever see Jact Bauer and Ghandi in the same sentence and have that sentence make sense ...u sir, now have my utmost respect
#9
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 05:53
Labrev
-
- Members
- 2 237 messages
I'll go on the record to make my opinion clear on this, YES - outcomes should be balanced, and imports should be unique.
For a risk vs. risk decision, such as Collector Base, the consequences should be as close to equal as they can make it: pros and cons for both sides, only pros for both sides, only cons for both sides.
For risk vs. non-risk decision, such as the Rachni Queen, the risk should result in both pros and cons, the non-risk in neither.
For imported games, all major decisions warrant acknowledgement and appropriate content. No single morality path should make up the standard game content, imported games should present a unique experience.
Notable exclusion from list: no cons-only vs. no-cons and/or all-pros outcomes. No decisions should result in major advantage over another, and no side should be severely disadvantaged to somehow validate the others'.
For a risk vs. risk decision, such as Collector Base, the consequences should be as close to equal as they can make it: pros and cons for both sides, only pros for both sides, only cons for both sides.
For risk vs. non-risk decision, such as the Rachni Queen, the risk should result in both pros and cons, the non-risk in neither.
For imported games, all major decisions warrant acknowledgement and appropriate content. No single morality path should make up the standard game content, imported games should present a unique experience.
Notable exclusion from list: no cons-only vs. no-cons and/or all-pros outcomes. No decisions should result in major advantage over another, and no side should be severely disadvantaged to somehow validate the others'.
#10
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 05:55
Cuddlezarro
-
- Members
- 5 327 messages
I love the Witcher 2 for that very reason. The dilemma you faced while making a decision not knowing which ones are going to come back and haunt you in the end.
near the end of act 1 and the whole of act 2 for example
#11
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 06:10
LucidStrike
-
- Members
- 900 messages
A lot of people, including the OP, are really oversimplifying things. THE UNIVERSE DOES NOT KEEP AN ETHICAL SCOREBOARD OR ANYTHING. The universe does not at all balance out ethical choices. The. Universe. Does. NOT. Care. It's all just chaos, determinant but not predictable. It's all a matter of context.
What that means for Shepard is that, yes, it may very well be the case that paragon choices ARE better choices in general, IN CONTEXT. Vice versa. #JustSayin
Since it's a game tho, BioWare should lead it all towards more or less equivalent endings I suppose.
What that means for Shepard is that, yes, it may very well be the case that paragon choices ARE better choices in general, IN CONTEXT. Vice versa. #JustSayin
Since it's a game tho, BioWare should lead it all towards more or less equivalent endings I suppose.
Modifié par LucidStrike, 19 décembre 2011 - 06:12 .
#12
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 06:14
Night Wraith
-
- Members
- 396 messages
The problem is often for optimal outcomes you need to simply choose mostly paragon or renegade in order to get the best options. Being forced to choose one or the other really railroads a lot of decisions and dialogue choices. Never been a big fan of that.
#13
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 06:20
Mr. Gogeta34
-
- Members
- 4 033 messages
LucidStrike wrote...
A lot of people, including the OP, are really oversimplifying things. THE UNIVERSE DOES NOT KEEP AN ETHICAL SCOREBOARD OR ANYTHING. The universe does not at all balance out ethical choices. The. Universe. Does. NOT. Care. It's all just chaos, determinant but not predictable. It's all a matter of context.
What that means for Shepard is that, yes, it may very well be the case that paragon choices ARE better choices in general, IN CONTEXT. Vice versa. #JustSayin
Since it's a game tho, BioWare should lead it all towards more or less equivalent endings I suppose.
It's not really... Bioware determines which choices have the best outcome... and thusfar they've relegated it to exclusively one type of choice (the blue button). When you have so many other choices to choose from... the notion of a "tough choice" is deflated once you figure this out.
silentspec111 wrote...
@Mr. Gogeta34: I never thought I would ever see Jact Bauer and Ghandi in the same sentence and have that sentence make sense ...u sir, now have my utmost respect
Kudos and right back at ya for appreciating that dychotomy
.
Modifié par Mr. Gogeta34, 19 décembre 2011 - 06:22 .
#14
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 06:37
xentar
-
- Members
- 937 messages
Well, they are actually in 2 separate sentences...Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
Kudos and right back at ya for appreciating that dychotomysilentspec111 wrote...
@Mr. Gogeta34: I never thought I would ever see Jact Bauer and Ghandi in the same sentence and have that sentence make sense ...u sir, now have my utmost respect
#15
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 06:55
silentspec111
-
- Members
- 261 messages
@xentar: oh right, didnt notice that.....guess my head was blown from the sheer awesomeness of having Bauer n Ghandi in the same post... XD
coming back to topic, @Lucidstrike:What we are trying to say here is that all paragon choices cant have good outcomes n all renegades bad one's that is not the way the world works. But the ME universe has been doing that since the last 2 games.
It would make the game much more interesting if they mix things up a little. Sure let para choices have better results in general but it wont be so bad to throw in some bad outcomes in their way sometimes. It makes the choices tougher to make and one has to put in a little thought behind it...rather than hitting the blue icon for optimal results all the time.
coming back to topic, @Lucidstrike:What we are trying to say here is that all paragon choices cant have good outcomes n all renegades bad one's that is not the way the world works. But the ME universe has been doing that since the last 2 games.
It would make the game much more interesting if they mix things up a little. Sure let para choices have better results in general but it wont be so bad to throw in some bad outcomes in their way sometimes. It makes the choices tougher to make and one has to put in a little thought behind it...rather than hitting the blue icon for optimal results all the time.
#16
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 06:59
Mr. Gogeta34
-
- Members
- 4 033 messages
xentar wrote...
Well, they are actually in 2 separate sentences...Mr. Gogeta34 wrote...
Kudos and right back at ya for appreciating that dychotomysilentspec111 wrote...
@Mr. Gogeta34: I never thought I would ever see Jact Bauer and Ghandi in the same sentence and have that sentence make sense ...u sir, now have my utmost respect
I'm looking past all of that.
#17
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 07:45
xentar
-
- Members
- 937 messages
Actually, I don't see how both stereotypes couldn't get desirable outcomes as long as 'desirable' is defined differently for each one.
#18
Guest_Saphra Deden_*
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 09:00
Guest_Saphra Deden_*
Guest_Saphra Deden_*
-
- Guests
Renegades should get most of the best outcomes because they approach their decisions logically. Paragons should often suffer for giving into emotion and weakness.
#20
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 09:04
mybudgee
-
- Members
- 23 036 messages
That statement is relative to each situation, Sahpra. Think about it.
#21
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 09:06
Inspectre
-
- Members
- 387 messages
Don't worry op, Bioware almost never changes the outcome eitherway.
#22
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 09:06
Dave of Canada
-
- Members
- 17 484 messages
Balancing both is essentially what I've been asking for these past few years.
#23
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 09:09
Ravensword
-
- Members
- 6 185 messages
Saphra Deden wrote...
Renegades should get most of the best outcomes because they approach their decisions logically. Paragons should often suffer for giving into emotion and weakness.
Right, b/c you never give into emotion.
#24
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 09:11
BellaStrega
-
- Members
- 1 001 messages
Saphra Deden wrote...
Renegades should get most of the best outcomes because they approach their decisions logically. Paragons should often suffer for giving into emotion and weakness.
This statement is factually inaccurate. It does not actually reflect the fact that there are logical reasons to make either Paragon or Renegade decisions, and there are emotional reasons to make either Paragon or Renegade decisions.
But this is a false dichotomy, as the choices likely have logical and emotional reasons behind them. For you, for me, for everyone who plays.
#25
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
Posté 19 décembre 2011 - 09:11
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
-
- Guests
Ravensword wrote...
Saphra Deden wrote...
Renegades should get most of the best outcomes because they approach their decisions logically. Paragons should often suffer for giving into emotion and weakness.
Right, b/c you never give into emotion.
Case in point (from another thread just 10 minutes ago):
Saphra Deden wrote...
Do you just mash your keyboard randomly? Amazing how it works though. I mean it almost seems like I'm
talking to a real person sometimes.
Modifié par Cthulhu42, 19 décembre 2011 - 09:12 .
