756 réponses à ce sujet

[Hunter of Legends]

Last Vizard wrote...

Hunter of Legends wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

Hunter of Legends wrote...

You know what I find funny.

Renegades complained about the whole Rachni Queen ordeal in ME3 yet they would still **** if by their actions there were no Rachni in ME3.

So basically Bioware can't win.

You can't just make general statements like that, I want paragon and renegade choices to have punishments for the player.  your told during the choice that the Rachni Queen is the last one and if you kill her, that species is gone forever....  They should be dead, I can't wait to see how the Geth consensus choice plays out in ME3.

Well, I won't say much because of spoilers but that is essentially what happens without removing content for the player.

But renegades are going to **** regardless because that is what BSN does best. No-one here will appreciate what Bioware is/was until it's gone. Then when it's gone you'll remind yourself of the good old days and how Bioware used to make good games.

I should know. Bungie used to be an amazing developer.

Then they made ODST and Reach.

... are you even talking to me or generalising about BSN as a whole again lol

To you and everyone. All of the BSN ****ers...from some of the Cerberus Defense Force to the paragons are perfect crowd to the Talimancers and the Liara plot armorists.

Be happy with what you have, and that Bioware still actually cares about you.

I was abandoned by my favorite  franchise. Video games just aren't the same to me anymore now...

[Hunter of Legends]

incinerator950 wrote...

Yuoaman wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

DJBare wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...
How would you react to having a civilian of signifcance?  You've used this statement to throw a wedge at people, yet you've never replied to it.

It would not matter whether I was intimate with the hostages or not, I'd still let Balak go.

So then you let him go, and he decides to relay an FTL warp bomb into a civilian location with your significant family/persons of interest.  Now what?

My significant objective if the hostage was mine wouldn't be saving Terra Nova, it would be a rescue operation. 

Honestly the plot reeks of Metagaming.

You can't know that, there are too many variables. He could be stabbed to death ten minutes later by someone else on his team who didn't sign up to destroy colonies, at the time you have no way of knowing and have to do what you feel is right.

Unfortunately some jackass leaked the plot for me again with Balak.  Which is why I take these discussions with more than a grain of salt.  Hence the metagaming.  I kill him as a prefference to my beliefs, people like that need to go away.  

And as I knew when I let him go...Balak was going to be a problem for Shepard down the road.

[incinerator950]

Well so I don't chain quote anymore, this is my differed judgement. If it was like Army of Two where the moral decisions would be co-op, then I'd either confer a consensus or "dissapear" while no one is looking, and shoot Balak on his way out when the Hostages were saved.

[incinerator950]

Hunter of Legends wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

Yuoaman wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

DJBare wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...
How would you react to having a civilian of signifcance?  You've used this statement to throw a wedge at people, yet you've never replied to it.

It would not matter whether I was intimate with the hostages or not, I'd still let Balak go.

So then you let him go, and he decides to relay an FTL warp bomb into a civilian location with your significant family/persons of interest.  Now what?

My significant objective if the hostage was mine wouldn't be saving Terra Nova, it would be a rescue operation. 

Honestly the plot reeks of Metagaming.

You can't know that, there are too many variables. He could be stabbed to death ten minutes later by someone else on his team who didn't sign up to destroy colonies, at the time you have no way of knowing and have to do what you feel is right.

Unfortunately some jackass leaked the plot for me again with Balak.  Which is why I take these discussions with more than a grain of salt.  Hence the metagaming.  I kill him as a prefference to my beliefs, people like that need to go away.  

And as I knew when I let him go...Balak was going to be a problem for Shepard down the road.

Not really, from what I heard, it just confirms the more "Paradurp metagaming" that's been beaten to death with the horse beating stick.

[Femlob]

Last Vizard wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Hunter of Legends wrote...

So basically Bioware can't win.

This is the BSN - of course they can't win.

... because theres so many different opinions, all they have to do is follow player choices logically instead of the Paragon is best because the natural world bends to their niceness

Or maybe they can just design the game the way they want it to be. Y'know, since they're the ones investing time, energy and money into making it come to life. Nobody's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy the game. At least, I hope not.

I can't recall a single BioWare game where they didn't favor the side of light, good, or whatever label you want to pin on it. It makes sense, because human beings generally favor things like positivism and hope over death and despair, in spite or perhaps exactly because of the world they live in. That there exists a vocal minority that just wants to see the galaxy burn shouldn't be of any concern to them.

Those who favor the dark, evil or whatever-label-you-want-to-pin-on-it side get to maim and/or kill anyone who gets in their way as well as roll with choices that no sane, empathic human would ever consider - and are treated with unique events and outcomes as a result. The buck's gotta stop somewhere.

[incinerator950]

Femlob wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Hunter of Legends wrote...

So basically Bioware can't win.

This is the BSN - of course they can't win.

... because theres so many different opinions, all they have to do is follow player choices logically instead of the Paragon is best because the natural world bends to their niceness

Or maybe they can just design the game the way they want it to be. Y'know, since they're the ones investing time, energy and money into making it come to life. Nobody's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy the game. At least, I hope not.

I can't recall a single BioWare game where they didn't favor the side of light, good, or whatever label you want to pin on it. It makes sense, because human beings generally favor things like positivism and hope over death and despair, in spite or perhaps exactly because of the world they live in. That there exists a vocal minority that just wants to see the galaxy burn shouldn't be of any concern to them.

Those who favor the dark, evil or whatever-label-you-want-to-pin-on-it side get to maim and/or kill anyone who gets in their way as well as roll with choices that no sane, empathic human would ever consider - and are treated with unique events and outcomes as a result. The buck's gotta stop somewhere.

True, but Kotor, Dragon Age, and a few other titles, even outside of Bioware are better at it.  Even Fable 3 actually makes it easier to save the people from certain death if you're a jackass.  

[Hunter of Legends]

incinerator950 wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Hunter of Legends wrote...

So basically Bioware can't win.

This is the BSN - of course they can't win.

... because theres so many different opinions, all they have to do is follow player choices logically instead of the Paragon is best because the natural world bends to their niceness

Or maybe they can just design the game the way they want it to be. Y'know, since they're the ones investing time, energy and money into making it come to life. Nobody's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy the game. At least, I hope not.

I can't recall a single BioWare game where they didn't favor the side of light, good, or whatever label you want to pin on it. It makes sense, because human beings generally favor things like positivism and hope over death and despair, in spite or perhaps exactly because of the world they live in. That there exists a vocal minority that just wants to see the galaxy burn shouldn't be of any concern to them.

Those who favor the dark, evil or whatever-label-you-want-to-pin-on-it side get to maim and/or kill anyone who gets in their way as well as roll with choices that no sane, empathic human would ever consider - and are treated with unique events and outcomes as a result. The buck's gotta stop somewhere.

True, but Kotor, Dragon Age, and a few other titles, even outside of Bioware are better at it.  Even Fable 3 actually makes it easier to save the people from certain death if you're a jackass.  

Yes but those games suffer in other ways...usually with extremely horid stories and terrible characters.

[WizenSlinky0]

incinerator950 wrote...

Unfortunately some jackass leaked the plot for me again with Balak.  Which is why I take these discussions with more than a grain of salt.  Hence the metagaming.  I kill him as a prefference to my beliefs, people like that need to go away.  

They really do.

But, there's in theory a finite number of terrorists at any one time. For a terrorist organization to accomplish something they require funding, manpower, materials, etc. Those are finitely avaliable to criminal organizations.

Let's say the Batarian government funds 10 groups with 100 assets divided amongst them. Each group now has 10 assets, working on different plans with various efficiencies.

You take out Balak, a criminal you know and can predict more accurately. One of two things happen.

A.) A new group recieves the assets meant for Balak and the status quo is mantained
B.) One of the other groups absorbs Balak's resources. You now have a single group with double the resources working on the same goal, rather than different goals. This could potentially take someone with an even more dangerous plan to new heights of death and destruction.

That's why these decisions aren't really cut and dry for either Paragons or Renegades.

[Femlob]

incinerator950 wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Hunter of Legends wrote...

So basically Bioware can't win.

This is the BSN - of course they can't win.

... because theres so many different opinions, all they have to do is follow player choices logically instead of the Paragon is best because the natural world bends to their niceness

Or maybe they can just design the game the way they want it to be. Y'know, since they're the ones investing time, energy and money into making it come to life. Nobody's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy the game. At least, I hope not.

I can't recall a single BioWare game where they didn't favor the side of light, good, or whatever label you want to pin on it. It makes sense, because human beings generally favor things like positivism and hope over death and despair, in spite or perhaps exactly because of the world they live in. That there exists a vocal minority that just wants to see the galaxy burn shouldn't be of any concern to them.

Those who favor the dark, evil or whatever-label-you-want-to-pin-on-it side get to maim and/or kill anyone who gets in their way as well as roll with choices that no sane, empathic human would ever consider - and are treated with unique events and outcomes as a result. The buck's gotta stop somewhere.

True, but Kotor, Dragon Age, and a few other titles, even outside of Bioware are better at it.  Even Fable 3 actually makes it easier to save the people from certain death if you're a jackass.  

Diversity - it's one of those things that makes our species great. If you feel one company didn't get it right, there's bound to be others out there who will.

[Dave of Canada]

Yeah, we're insane for not seeing the world in black and white. We're evil for seeing the genophage as necessary or not risking millions of lives on the Rachni, let alone galactic destruction for the Council.

How dare we complain that Bioware is telling us we're playing the game wrong, we should kiss their feet and bless how they ignored our decisions to fit their paragon-centric run. Who cares if we're punished and told constantly in both games how we screwed up, they really need to rub it in by making terrorists help you if you spared them.

Can't have the sunshine squad get punished, can we?

[Femlob]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Yeah, we're insane for not seeing the world in black and white. We're evil for seeing the genophage as necessary or not risking millions of lives on the Rachni, let alone galactic destruction for the Council.

How dare we complain that Bioware is telling us we're playing the game wrong, we should kiss their feet and bless how they ignored our decisions to fit their paragon-centric run. Who cares if we're punished and told constantly in both games how we screwed up, they really need to rub it in by making terrorists help you if you spared them.

Can't have the sunshine squad get punished, can we?

If it bothers you this much, maybe you should go play another game.

To re-iterate: it's their game. You play within the boundaries they set. If there is favoritism, which I suspect there is (and which doesn't surprise me, as I explained above), you'll just have to put up with it - or stop playing. It is what it is.

Modifié par Femlob, 06 février 2012 - 07:39 .

[incinerator950]

Femlob wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Last Vizard wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Hunter of Legends wrote...

So basically Bioware can't win.

This is the BSN - of course they can't win.

... because theres so many different opinions, all they have to do is follow player choices logically instead of the Paragon is best because the natural world bends to their niceness

Or maybe they can just design the game the way they want it to be. Y'know, since they're the ones investing time, energy and money into making it come to life. Nobody's holding a gun to your head and forcing you to buy the game. At least, I hope not.

I can't recall a single BioWare game where they didn't favor the side of light, good, or whatever label you want to pin on it. It makes sense, because human beings generally favor things like positivism and hope over death and despair, in spite or perhaps exactly because of the world they live in. That there exists a vocal minority that just wants to see the galaxy burn shouldn't be of any concern to them.

Those who favor the dark, evil or whatever-label-you-want-to-pin-on-it side get to maim and/or kill anyone who gets in their way as well as roll with choices that no sane, empathic human would ever consider - and are treated with unique events and outcomes as a result. The buck's gotta stop somewhere.

True, but Kotor, Dragon Age, and a few other titles, even outside of Bioware are better at it.  Even Fable 3 actually makes it easier to save the people from certain death if you're a jackass.  

Diversity - it's one of those things that makes our species great. If you feel one company didn't get it right, there's bound to be others out there who will.

Nah, Bioware is doing a good job.  The irony is I'm discussing it from a perspective I actually don't use.  I play Paragade/Renegon in the absence of neutrality, so I'm trying to get the best of being an ass when I'm nice. A lot of things went wrong in Fable 3, I'm just offering a side opinion to the case not everything goes linear in morality.  

I was actually impressed with Army of Two, saving people only to actually get the glimpse of their future, which actually doens't have a positive outcome...Save the tiger, who killed a criminal.  I was proud of that one.

[Femlob]

incinerator950 wrote...

<snip>

Nah, Bioware is doing a good job.  The irony is I'm discussing it from a perspective I actually don't use.  I play Paragade/Renegon in the absence of neutrality, so I'm trying to get the best of being an ass when I'm nice. A lot of things went wrong in Fable 3, I'm just offering a side opinion to the case not everything goes linear in morality.  

I was actually impressed with Army of Two, saving people only to actually get the glimpse of their future, which actually doens't have a positive outcome...Save the tiger, who killed a criminal.  I was proud of that one.

You mention neutrality, which is one of the things that's had me puzzled for a while - mainly because I believe that neutrality doesn't exist. It's quite possible that you simply don't give a damn about something, but once you do you'll inevitably form an opinion and choose a side. Your choices might average out in the middle, but I wouldn't call that neutrality.

Hrm - you could also choose not to get involved, but I'm not sure if I'd call that neutrality either. Everyone calls the Swiss neutral - I just think they're playing all sides.

Modifié par Femlob, 06 février 2012 - 07:43 .

[Seboist]

There's no neutrality or picking sides(in a tangible sense) in ME3. All one finds is streamlining and railroading with the Cerberus,Rachni and Geth plots.

[Hunter of Legends]

Dave of Canada wrote...

Yeah, we're insane for not seeing the world in black and white. We're evil for seeing the genophage as necessary or not risking millions of lives on the Rachni, let alone galactic destruction for the Council.

How dare we complain that Bioware is telling us we're playing the game wrong, we should kiss their feet and bless how they ignored our decisions to fit their paragon-centric run. Who cares if we're punished and told constantly in both games how we screwed up, they really need to rub it in by making terrorists help you if you spared them.

Can't have the sunshine squad get punished, can we?

Well you're just a ball of sunshine aren't you?

Never happy no matter WHAT Bioware does.

[Femlob]

Seboist wrote...

There's no neutrality or picking sides(in a tangible sense) in ME3. All one finds is streamlining and railroading with the Cerberus,Rachni and Geth plots.

If those are the dominant factors in the plot, it makes sense that everyone involved would be affected by it to a greater or lesser extent. You can't always shape the battlefield - sometimes you'll just have to roll with what's already in place.

[incinerator950]

Femlob wrote...

incinerator950 wrote...

<snip>

Nah, Bioware is doing a good job.  The irony is I'm discussing it from a perspective I actually don't use.  I play Paragade/Renegon in the absence of neutrality, so I'm trying to get the best of being an ass when I'm nice. A lot of things went wrong in Fable 3, I'm just offering a side opinion to the case not everything goes linear in morality.  

I was actually impressed with Army of Two, saving people only to actually get the glimpse of their future, which actually doens't have a positive outcome...Save the tiger, who killed a criminal.  I was proud of that one.

You mention neutrality, which is one of the things that's had me puzzled for a while - mainly because I believe that neutrality doesn't exist. It's quite possible that you simply don't give a damn about something, but once you do you'll inevitably form an opinion and choose a side. Your choices might average out in the middle, but I wouldn't call that neutrality.

Hrm - you could also choose not to get involved, but I'm not sure if I'd call that neutrality either. Everyone calls the Swiss neutral - I just think they're playing all sides.

I could concur, but apathy is sometimes hard to pull off.  I like a mellow even ground. 

[Hunter of Legends]

Seboist wrote...

There's no neutrality or picking sides(in a tangible sense) in ME3. All one finds is streamlining and railroading with the Cerberus,Rachni and Geth plots.

You can't really be neutral in a galactic war of genocide. Either you fight or you die; this means you HAVE to pick sides in each of the species conflicts/paragon them to all loving you.

You can't just sit by and pick up the winner.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Hunter of Legends wrote...
 Then when it's gone you'll remind yourself of the good old days and how Bioware used to make good games.

Why are you writing that in future tense?

you know, some would argue it's already happening.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Femlob wrote...

Those who favor the dark, evil or whatever-label-you-want-to-pin-on-it side get to maim and/or kill anyone who gets in their way as well as roll with choices that no sane, empathic human would ever consider - and are treated with unique events and outcomes as a result. The buck's gotta stop somewhere.

Strange..I could cateogirze some paragon decisions as such,

[Hunter of Legends]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Those who favor the dark, evil or whatever-label-you-want-to-pin-on-it side get to maim and/or kill anyone who gets in their way as well as roll with choices that no sane, empathic human would ever consider - and are treated with unique events and outcomes as a result. The buck's gotta stop somewhere.

Strange..I could cateogirze some paragon decisions as such,

Both moralities have those.

It fits with Biowares theme of not going to the extremes of either morality.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Femlob wrote...
If it bothers you this much, maybe you should go play another game.

To re-iterate: it's their game. You play within the boundaries they set. If there is favoritism, which I suspect there is (and which doesn't surprise me, as I explained above), you'll just have to put up with it - or stop playing.

OR....we can complain.

You'll just have to put up with it - or stop reading these threads

[Hunter of Legends]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Hunter of Legends wrote...
 Then when it's gone you'll remind yourself of the good old days and how Bioware used to make good games.

Why are you writing that in future tense?

you know, some would argue it's already happening.

Perhaps

but you have to admit it's nowhere near as bad as most of the complainers make it out to be. Trust me when I say Bioware hasn't become Bungie yet or Infinity Ward yet.

[Yuoaman]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Those who favor the dark, evil or whatever-label-you-want-to-pin-on-it side get to maim and/or kill anyone who gets in their way as well as roll with choices that no sane, empathic human would ever consider - and are treated with unique events and outcomes as a result. The buck's gotta stop somewhere.

Strange..I could cateogirze some paragon decisions as such,

Which ones?

And it's "categorize".

And ellipses have three periods, unless you're one of those wacky people who think they should have four when at the end of a sentence - crazy.

[Femlob]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Femlob wrote...
If it bothers you this much, maybe you should go play another game.

To re-iterate: it's their game. You play within the boundaries they set. If there is favoritism, which I suspect there is (and which doesn't surprise me, as I explained above), you'll just have to put up with it - or stop playing.

OR....we can complain.

You'll just have to put up with it - or stop reading these threads

Oh, I'll put up with it. If nothing else, it gives me something to do when I don't feel like playing a game.

Thing is, of course, that come March 9th (or 6th, for those of you in North America) I won't be the one booting up my console looking for things to hate on and complain about - I'll just be enjoying the game for what it is.

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Femlob wrote...

Those
who favor the dark, evil or whatever-label-you-want-to-pin-on-it side
get to maim and/or kill anyone who gets in their way as well as roll with choices that no sane, empathic human would ever consider - and are treated with unique events and outcomes as a result. The buck's gotta stop somewhere.

Strange..I could cateogirze some paragon decisions as such,

Really? Feel free to enlighten me.