437 réponses à ce sujet

[Ahglock]

mitthrawuodo wrote...

what about the fact that they may have been controlled by the reapers (probably were) and so aren't a villian but a victim

How the hell would I know that at this point and at best it just means they are prone to indoctrination if I have a lot more information than I ever had at that point in the story.  

[AgitatedLemon]

GodWood wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...
Does it make my choice any less valid? No.

But it does make your opinion in this discussion useless.

So does you saying "You're stupid", like you did earlier.

Then again, you never were very bright.

[Il Divo]

Ahglock wrote...

Yeah I tend to do all the siedequests I can as soon as possible so I can justify doing them instead of stopping Saren/Collectors.  At least they vocalized in ME2 a we need to get stronger concept.  

That's my approach as well. It still can become frustrating as you unravel more and more of Saren's plans, but it's still much better than Shepard doing all the side quests after Virmire (for example) at which point it seems absolutely insane for him to do so.

[Ahglock]

AgitatedLemon wrote...

When I know for a fact "Well, she can become useful later", I'm willing to break my suspension of belief for 3 seconds to hit the dialogue button.

Does it make my choice any less valid? No.

I never judged you for your decision.  You insulted me for mine.  Whatever makes your game more fun is what is the most valid thing a person can do since it is you know a video game.  

[KBomb]

Ahglock wrote...

I never judged you for your decision.  You insulted me for mine.  Whatever makes your game more fun is what is the most valid thing a person can do since it is you know a video game.  

 
/thread

[rapscallioness]

Ahglock wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

When I know for a fact "Well, she can become useful later", I'm willing to break my suspension of belief for 3 seconds to hit the dialogue button.

Does it make my choice any less valid? No.

I never judged you for your decision.  You insulted me for mine.  Whatever makes your game more fun is what is the most valid thing a person can do since it is you know a video game.  

And that's how I feel about it. I mean, I like to hear about different ppl's reasons for the choices they made. I think it's interesting.

What grates my nerves, however, is that alot of Renegades won't do that without also disrespecting Paragon players.

[AlexXIV]

Ahglock wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

When I know for a fact "Well, she can become useful later", I'm willing to break my suspension of belief for 3 seconds to hit the dialogue button.

Does it make my choice any less valid? No.

I never judged you for your decision.  You insulted me for mine.  Whatever makes your game more fun is what is the most valid thing a person can do since it is you know a video game.  

Well not to mention that Shepard is mostly in a position to make a decision no matter how many people agree or disagree with him/her. So there is no need to make a decision that makes sense unless your Shep feels bound to make decisions that make sense. Basically you can go around and play god. Which is fine imo.

[KBomb]

rapscallioness wrote...

And that's how I feel about it. I mean, I like to hear about different ppl's reasons for the choices they made. I think it's interesting.

What grates my nerves, however, is that alot of Renegades won't do that without also disrespecting Paragon players.

Well, to be fair, this can be said on the other side of the fence, as well. I mean, look at the title of this thread. Renegades are singled out a lot, imo.

[AgitatedLemon]

Ahglock wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

When I know for a fact "Well, she can become useful later", I'm willing to break my suspension of belief for 3 seconds to hit the dialogue button.

Does it make my choice any less valid? No.

I never judged you for your decision.  You insulted me for mine.  Whatever makes your game more fun is what is the most valid thing a person can do since it is you know a video game.  

And I apologize. Now that you explained your reasoning, I can see that it's more than idiotic decision making.

[Il Divo]

AgitatedLemon wrote...

And I apologize. Now that you explained your reasoning, I can see that it's more than idiotic decision making.

Just as a forewarning, you might want to clarify this. The statement can be read as you either saying that his reasoning is not idiotic, or rather that it's more idiotic than you previously suspected. Might let us all avoid a potential flame war.

[rapscallioness]

KBomb wrote...

rapscallioness wrote...

And that's how I feel about it. I mean, I like to hear about different ppl's reasons for the choices they made. I think it's interesting.

What grates my nerves, however, is that alot of Renegades won't do that without also disrespecting Paragon players.

Well, to be fair, this can be said on the other side of the fence, as well. I mean, look at the title of this thread. Renegades are singled out a lot, imo.

I think the OP was actually a sincere question. Because it can be difficult for some players to make those choices, even when they're trying to diversify their playthrus.

Perhaps it does go both ways. It usually does, doesn't it?

[AgitatedLemon]

Il Divo wrote...

AgitatedLemon wrote...

And I apologize. Now that you explained your reasoning, I can see that it's more than idiotic decision making.

Just as a forewarning, you might want to clarify this. The statement can be read as you either saying that his reasoning is not idiotic, or rather that it's more idiotic than you previously suspected. Might let us all avoid a potential flame war.

Damn.

Before, I saw it as blind idiotic decision making.

Now that it was explained, I see that it isn't blind, nor is it idiotic.

[Il Divo]

AgitatedLemon wrote...

Damn.

Before, I saw it as blind idiotic decision making.

Now that it was explained, I see that it isn't blind, nor is it idiotic.

Right on.

[KBomb]

rapscallioness wrote...

I think the OP was actually a sincere question. Because it can be difficult for some players to make those choices, even when they're trying to diversify their playthrus.

Perhaps it does go both ways. It usually does, doesn't it?

You’re absolutely right, it does go both ways. I know it can be difficult to make some choices. For instance, when rolling mainly renegade, I can never bring myself to be cross with my teammates.
 
I see a lot of paragons calling the reasoning behind a renegade’s decisions “stupid”. For instance when KotorEffect3 missed the point and said my reasoning is stupid. It is no different to kill a video game character simply because you dislike them, than it is to let one live simply because you don’t want to come off as a “douche” or because your heart is too soft to make a hard decision, (and I am not insulting that reasoning, as I feel the same way sometimes.) Either way, a decision is being made on feeling rather than reasoning. There isn’t much difference in the thought process, the renegades just seem to take a lot of flack for it, though. At least that is how I perceive it to be.

[Lotion Soronarr]

KBomb wrote...

Ahglock wrote...

I never judged you for your decision.  You insulted me for mine.  Whatever makes your game more fun is what is the most valid thing a person can do since it is you know a video game.  

 
/thread

Valid as a decision, but NOT valid as an in-game decision.
And thing is, we're not discussing the first one.

[KBomb]

No, some are not. Some are discussing. Some are insulting. There is a difference. It is not adding validity to a discussion by calling someone “stupid”, “whiners”, or any other derogatory word thrown about because it doesn’t fit into their logic, and that goes for both side of the coin. Any point, valid or otherwise is void when you start to sink to that level.


To say, “I don’t understand that choice. It isn’t the one I would have made because…etc.” is quite the opposite of saying, “The twisted mind of a pure renegade never ceases to amaze me.” or “Your reasoning is so stupid!” Using insults to illustrate the validity of a choice, whether it makes sense in-game or not, is useless and adds nothing and will only incite one side or another. It’s the theme of all renegade/paragon threads.

[KotorEffect3]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

KBomb wrote...

Ahglock wrote...

I never judged you for your decision.  You insulted me for mine.  Whatever makes your game more fun is what is the most valid thing a person can do since it is you know a video game.  

 
/thread

Valid as a decision, but NOT valid as an in-game decision.
And thing is, we're not discussing the first one.

As long as the reasoning is valid almost any in game decision can be valid.

[DPSSOC]

rapscallioness wrote...

As far as the Rachni Queen, I think Kotor mentioned this already, but she is innocent. She had nothing to do with the Rachni Wars. You cannot hold her responsible for what her ancestors did.

No, but we can use it as a benchmark for species behaviour.  We do this with everyone (at least I do); I base my expectations on how people of certain groups (ethnic, religious, national, etc.) will behave on how those I've met previously behaved.  Example I expect Americans to make stupid jokes about Canada because every American I've met has made stupid jokes about Canada.

Similarly with the Rachni; we have centuries of war, and the entirety of Shepard's personal experience, pointing to the conclusion that the Rachni are remarkably hostile, vs the word of one of them that they aren't.

rapscallioness wrote...
We have no proof that the Rachni Queen on Noveria is going to behave the same way her ancestors did. Or that she even agrees with their actions. So all you're left with is an assumption.

 
In both directions; the difference being, as stated above, the assumption that she will be hostile is based on a mountain of evidence that shall be referred to as Exhibit A; "The Entirety of Rachni/Citadel Relations," while the assumption that she will not be hostile is based on her word.

rapscallioness wrote...
An assumption of what she might do based upon what her ancestors did, but she is not her ancestors. And an assumption is not enough to justify killing her, and effectively ending an entire species.

Nor is the word of one individual enough to justify risking the continued survival of every other species.

rapscallioness wrote...
We have absolutely no proof of what this particular Rachni's future choices will be.

 
I refer you back to Exhibit A.

rapscallioness wrote...
So, the decision to kill her is not based on logic. It's based on a very real emotion. And that emotion is fear. You're afraid of her. You're afraid of what she might do, not what she has done.

Yes but so is the decision to let her go.  Neither side has all the info they need to be 100% justified in their decision; Renegades are making assumptions but so are Paragons.  It all comes down to a simple question, is one life worth the risk of another Rachni War?  Some people say yes subscribing to the whole, "better to let 10 guilty men go free than to wrongly convict 1 innocent." ideal and I can understand that.  Others (myself included) say no, no one life is worth another couple centuries of war that we might not win this time.

There's one question I always ask myself when I make these decisions; what if I'm wrong?  With the Rachni if I kill her and I'm wrong one innocent has died, if I let her go and I'm wrong hundreds, thousands, millions, possibly billions of innocents will die.

[AlexXIV]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

KBomb wrote...

Ahglock wrote...

I never judged you for your decision.  You insulted me for mine.  Whatever makes your game more fun is what is the most valid thing a person can do since it is you know a video game.  

 
/thread

Valid as a decision, but NOT valid as an in-game decision.
And thing is, we're not discussing the first one.

As long as the reasoning is valid almost any in game decision can be valid.

Tbh any decision that works out well enough is valid. Because in the end what's counts is the result, not how you got there.

[KotorEffect3]

AlexXIV wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

KBomb wrote...

Ahglock wrote...

I never judged you for your decision.  You insulted me for mine.  Whatever makes your game more fun is what is the most valid thing a person can do since it is you know a video game.  

 
/thread

Valid as a decision, but NOT valid as an in-game decision.
And thing is, we're not discussing the first one.

As long as the reasoning is valid almost any in game decision can be valid.

Tbh any decision that works out well enough is valid. Because in the end what's counts is the result, not how you got there.

Yeah but using the actual result to argue your decision gets into metagaming.  What you are saying makes sense for real life decisions but in the context of roleplaying we are discussing the journey and the chosen paths more than the destination.

[Soccer FeverMan]

Its really easy, but i gotta say i fell to metagaming i couldn't kill the queen cuz i already had two files where she was dead since i started them off from ME2 direclty, i just wanted some variety...im ashamed of myself. but RENEGADES are awesome

[KotorEffect3]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Knowing that I am morally and intellectually superior to my peers certainly makes it easier.

lol even you know that statement is bs

[G3rman]

Whenever I play RPGs in general I find myself always becoming a good guy, mainly because being evil just doesn't sit well for me.

Mass Effect was unique though in the fact that Renegade does not necessarily mean "evil". The action taken by Renegades can be quite radical and unnecessary but sometimes they are acceptable for the greater good.

My recent playthroughs I've been playing a mixed approach where I lean toward Paragon but when a renegade interrupt or dialog option appeals to what I'm feeling I use it. Honestly, just because my character is trying to be diplomatic I'm not going to let you pull a gun on me; I'm going to shoot you in the face.

Like when you try and meet Fade with the volus and krogan, I shoot the Krogan before they can do anything. They were a possible threat and I take them down, but before it got hostile my character was speaking in the Paragon/polite manner.

Also if I'm speaking with someone is I just dislike I will have my character speak in a harsh fashion instead of just opting good all the time, it actually makes the playthrough feel more like I'm playing.

But to directly speak about the thread topic, I don't think I could ever be a complete Renegade. Sometimes their actions are a little too over the top and crass for my taste.

[AlexXIV]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

AlexXIV wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

KBomb wrote...

Ahglock wrote...

I never judged you for your decision.  You insulted me for mine.  Whatever makes your game more fun is what is the most valid thing a person can do since it is you know a video game.  

 
/thread

Valid as a decision, but NOT valid as an in-game decision.
And thing is, we're not discussing the first one.

As long as the reasoning is valid almost any in game decision can be valid.

Tbh any decision that works out well enough is valid. Because in the end what's counts is the result, not how you got there.

Yeah but using the actual result to argue your decision gets into metagaming.  What you are saying makes sense for real life decisions but in the context of roleplaying we are discussing the journey and the chosen paths more than the destination.

My Shep's an idealist obviously. That's all justification I need. I mean letting the Rachni Queen go is a bit reckless. Because you don't know how many people will pay the price. But out of principle I will not end an entire species. Even if it means that alot of people may die for it.