307 réponses à ce sujet

[DeinonSlayer]

Magiking117 wrote...

I agree with DeinonSlayer; I shouldn't have the 'good' and 'bad' choices spelt out to me. I've actually been thinking about this quite a bit lately, and have come to the conclusion that the way ME handles choices actually hurts my experience with the games. It genuinely frustrates me that if I want to go down the hero path, all I have to do is pick the blue text, or any north of the dialogue wheel. It makes it so I don't have to consider anything when presented with a scenario. All one needs to do is hold he stick top left/right and bash A/X.

I've been playing the original Deus Ex and I love the way they present choice. It's just a list of options and you pick whichever you feel is best for the JC you're crafting - or based on you're own thoughts. There is one option which made me question my decision, but I knew it was for the best. Turns out it was, and lead to an easier time with a future boss. I'm playing a 'good' JC, but the choice I made would have been considered a 'renegade' one in ME and I probably wouldn't have chosen it. Here, however, 'I' decide what's for the best. 'I' chose what 'I' - as a 'paragon' JC - think is right. Whatever the consequences, I will have to deal. What's important is that I make a decision based on my own thoughts.

Future ME games need to be vague about their choices, otherwise it simply takes away the charm of having choice. No more spelling it out, and penalising me for choosing what I feel is the right choice for my 'Paragon' or 'renegade' character. 

This.

Given distribution of outcomes, the player is basically conditioned to bash the top of the wheel without considering what's actually being said - what position is being advocated. In so doing, the player isn't making their own choices. They're deferring judgement to the writers about what's right or wrong, absorbing whatever Shepard spits out, and then coming on the boards and parroting it here.

+2 Paragon

By simply switching around the dialogue options in the wheel so you can't consistently click the same place to fit Mac's image of an "ideal hero," and removing the morality meter, the player is forced to pay attention to what's happening and develop their own opinions.

Don't worry, David. Shepard is still "the hero" - only with this setup, the player isn't sleepwalking through the dialogue.

[David7204]

pirate1802 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Nobody here is really talking about the color-coding, I don't think. Because color-coding or no, it's completely obvious what the 'right' choice is. As it should be. Save lives, help people out, etc.

Sometimes its not so obvious. Think of letting Bakal off/killing him. And I do believe games especially RPGs need to work on making the "right" choice less "obvious".

It is obvious. Whether it's the best choice or not can be debated, but there's no question that saving hostages is the more 'heroic' action then killing a terrorist. That it embodies the 'heroic' ideals of saving innocents and whatnot instead of ruthlessness.

[David7204]

You're not helping your arguing one bit by immaturely suggesting that Paragon Shepard is somehow 'Mac Walter's idea of a hero' when Walters would have had utterly nothing to do with the overwhelmingly majority of dialogue in the series.

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

You're not helping your arguing one bit by immaturely suggesting that Paragon Shepard is somehow 'Mac Walter's idea of a hero' when Walters would have had utterly nothing to do with the overwhelmingly majority of dialogue in the series.

Would you rather I said your image of an "ideal hero," then? I'm sure you could still find the dialogue options you'd pick anyway. It would just be in a different place on the wheel, and play out with no accompanying announcement that it was paragon or renegade.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 30 janvier 2013 - 07:02 .

[David7204]

No. This is not the writer's idea of a hero. Or mine. These are heroic qualities, period. A hero is compassionate, honorable, kind, selfless. That's what makes him a hero.

You can argue whether being a hero or being pragmatic is the best option (although the idea that heroism and pragmatism are somehow opposed is baseless itself), but a hero is defined.

Don't confuse 'being a hero' with 'being effective.' Or 'being the protagonist.'

Modifié par David7204, 30 janvier 2013 - 07:05 .

[DeinonSlayer]

pirate1802 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Nobody here is really talking about the color-coding, I don't think. Because color-coding or no, it's completely obvious what the 'right' choice is. As it should be. Save lives, help people out, etc.

Sometimes its not so obvious. Think of letting Bakal off/killing him. And I do believe games especially RPGs need to work on making the "right" choice less "obvious".

It kinda got buried in an edited post, but it bears repeating: some of the "decisions" in ME3 (like what to do with Jona Sederis) were embarrassing in their simplicity (Release the ranting psychopath who's vowed revenge against me from jail or not? WHAT SHOULD I DO?!).

I miss the days of ME1 where you're approached by a businesswoman asking you to engage in espionage on a rival businessman suspected of violating her company's patents, and you were given no less than six different ways to handle it - and could fail in doing so.

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

No. This is not the writer's idea of a hero. Or mine. These are heroic qualities, period. A hero is compassionate, honorable, kind, selfless. That's what makes him a hero.

You can argue whether being a hero or being pragmatic is the best option (although the idea that heroism and pragmatism are somehow opposed is baseless itself), but a hero is defined.

Don't confuse 'being a hero' with 'being effective.' Or 'being the protagonist.'

As I said, you'd have no trouble finding the dialogue that you would consider "heroic" then. And you'd do it without paragon/renegade alignment whispering in your ear. It would be Shepard's words, but your decision, unbiased, without outside influence.

[Magiking117]

Here's a good example. In ME1, you have those indoctrinated Salarians. They're basically Husks. Nothing of what they were remains. The game tells you that leaving them in that state is Paragon, and killing them is Renegade. Now, as a soldier - and as Wrex rightfully states - you are doing the absolute good thing by those empty shells by ending their suffering - I say soldier because they're no strangers to having to carry out such acts. That's not you making a heartless or morally questionable choice, that's you doing what's best for them. No one  would ever want to go on in that condition, and I shouldn't have to feel like I'm doing the 'bad' thing by saving them from such a horrid fate.

It bothered me that the game says that what I felt was good, was bad. I chose the renegade choice, anyway.

Modifié par Magiking117, 30 janvier 2013 - 07:13 .

[DirtyPhoenix]

David7204 wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Nobody here is really talking about the color-coding, I don't think. Because color-coding or no, it's completely obvious what the 'right' choice is. As it should be. Save lives, help people out, etc.

Sometimes its not so obvious. Think of letting Bakal off/killing him. And I do believe games especially RPGs need to work on making the "right" choice less "obvious".

It is obvious. Whether it's the best choice or not can be debated, but there's no question that saving hostages is the more 'heroic' action then killing a terrorist. That it embodies the 'heroic' ideals of saving innocents and whatnot instead of ruthlessness.

Depends on what your idea of a hero is. My hero is not a shortsighted one, so she does the you-know-what. It would have been interesting to have Balak go and bomb another planet if let off. That would have been a nice balance. There comes another complaint against ME-s morality system: If you can get everything being a paragon angel, why be a douche?

[David7204]

What 'outside influence' is there in the system now?

[k.lalh]

pirate1802 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Nobody here is really talking about the color-coding, I don't think. Because color-coding or no, it's completely obvious what the 'right' choice is. As it should be. Save lives, help people out, etc.

Sometimes its not so obvious. Think of letting Bakal off/killing him. And I do believe games especially RPGs need to work on making the "right" choice less "obvious".

It is obvious. Whether it's the best choice or not can be debated, but there's no question that saving hostages is the more 'heroic' action then killing a terrorist. That it embodies the 'heroic' ideals of saving innocents and whatnot instead of ruthlessness.

Depends on what your idea of a hero is. My hero is not a shortsighted one, so she does the you-know-what. It would have been interesting to have Balak go and bomb another planet if let off. That would have been a nice balance. There comes another complaint against ME-s morality system: If you can get everything being a paragon angel, why be a douche?

^This.

I can only think of one option where being a douche was actually beneficial. If you kill Wrex in ME1, have both Wreav and Eve alive, and shoot Mordin, then you maximize your war assets.

For a 100h trilogy, there should be way more than that.

[David7204]

pirate1802 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Nobody here is really talking about the color-coding, I don't think. Because color-coding or no, it's completely obvious what the 'right' choice is. As it should be. Save lives, help people out, etc.

Sometimes its not so obvious. Think of letting Bakal off/killing him. And I do believe games especially RPGs need to work on making the "right" choice less "obvious".

It is obvious. Whether it's the best choice or not can be debated, but there's no question that saving hostages is the more 'heroic' action then killing a terrorist. That it embodies the 'heroic' ideals of saving innocents and whatnot instead of ruthlessness.

Depends on what your idea of a hero is. My hero is not a shortsighted one, so she does the you-know-what. It would have been interesting to have Balak go and bomb another planet if let off. That would have been a nice balance. There comes another complaint against ME-s morality system: If you can get everything being a paragon angel, why be a douche?

You can't do that. A hero is defined archetype. A ruthless character is not a hero, even if his or her actions lead to a better outcome.

[GimmeDaGun]

David7204 wrote...

No. This is exactly what you're talking about. You're trying to pretend that you're capable of 'acting' through the game yourself. That you're capable of 'being a hero' yourself.

You aren't coming with any of the arguments. Shepard is.
You aren't the one living with the consequences. Shepard is.
You aren't the one doing any of the work. Shepard is.

You keep pretending that you don't need the game to 'hold your hand,' but you absolutely do. You are not doing the work. You aren't! Shepard is. You're pressing a button.

All stories 'tell' the audience information. They wouldn't be stories otherwise. It's completely ridiculous to resent the story 'telling' you information. You need to accept that your heroism as a player is an illusion. It's fake. Shepard's heroism is real, and all you're proposing is to make THAT fake by pointlessly obscuring it.

This is all true, and I'd agree, but where the hell is the fun in this? I mean, ME is a game which is built on a story acted out in different ways by the player. Shepard of course is the same hero with the same story to tell, but it is you who direct him or her throughout the series and make an impact on the story by those "clicks". So it's the same story with different permutations. That's the fun about ME, the rest is a good story and characters you enjoy (this is the feature I love the most about the games), and shooting of course (it entertains me, but not the thing that made me love the series). 

The point is, illusion and it's entertainment values. No one believes that he or she is the hero while playing the game, but can be easily immersed by the illusion of controlling or role-playing that hero. It's fun, lots of fun and it lets you get more attached to the protagonist emotionally (in that regard the whole setting and the rest of the characters help a lot too). That's why so many hate the ending of the game so much (I happen to like it very much, but for very different reasons... and no IT)... because they are attached to this character and his or her story. The illusion of directing this character and  "writing" hir or her story is taken away - in a way - in the end of the story (actually it is not, but it is written in a way that people despise... they believed that Shepard was unstoppable and invincible - for a reason I might add (illusion), and yet in the end even Shep has to make a compromise and is forced into a very difficult situation - but lets not go there). 

The point is: the more control you get over the decisions and dialogues (not the consequences... unfortunately in this regard the whole ME series failed, because you could always figure out which decision lead to the "good" consequences - except the ending, that was the only really difficult choice) and the more options you have in that regard - in other words: more role-playing - the more fun you have. 

Just take a look at The Witcher 2. That's role playing through and trough. You never know what's coming, but you have to make tons of decisions (and it's up to you in what manner)... well the consequences (lets say that they catch up with you). This gives you tons of permutations. ME had lots of permutations also (and it is clear that in its case we are dealing with a whole trilogy which makes a huge difference), but a lot less real role playing (you always knew which path you should take if you wanted a better result: eg. the most stupid decision was giving Legion to Cerberus or keeping it... it was sooo obvious as hell). 

So it's about fun. 

Modifié par GimmeDaGun, 30 janvier 2013 - 07:19 .

[David7204]

Okay, let's get this straight. A hero is a powerful and capable character who is compassionate, honorable, selfless, etc. Period. Basically, a Paragon character. That is not up for debate. The ME writers do not 'tell' the player this.

What IS up for debate is whether being a hero is the 'best' option.

[CynicalShep]

David7204 wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

pirate1802 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Nobody here is really talking about the color-coding, I don't think. Because color-coding or no, it's completely obvious what the 'right' choice is. As it should be. Save lives, help people out, etc.

Sometimes its not so obvious. Think of letting Bakal off/killing him. And I do believe games especially RPGs need to work on making the "right" choice less "obvious".

It is obvious. Whether it's the best choice or not can be debated, but there's no question that saving hostages is the more 'heroic' action then killing a terrorist. That it embodies the 'heroic' ideals of saving innocents and whatnot instead of ruthlessness.

Depends on what your idea of a hero is. My hero is not a shortsighted one, so she does the you-know-what. It would have been interesting to have Balak go and bomb another planet if let off. That would have been a nice balance. There comes another complaint against ME-s morality system: If you can get everything being a paragon angel, why be a douche?

You can't do that. A hero is defined archetype. A ruthless character is not a hero, even if his or her actions lead to a better outcome.

http://www.merriam-w...dictionary/hero

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

What 'outside influence' is there in the system now?

Paragon/Renegade points.

Don't apply labels to our actions. No silly meters. Don't add add angry red scars to the character's face because they believe the Genophage stopped the Krogan from conquering the galaxy, or that the Quarians deserve to go home. These are supposed to be morally-complex, contentious issues. Lay out the facts before us, and let us make our own judgements without that outside push.

[GimmeDaGun]

David7204 wrote...

Okay, let's get this straight. A hero is a powerful and capable character who is compassionate, honorable, selfless, etc. Period. Basically, a Paragon character. That is not up for debate. The ME writers do not 'tell' the player this.

What IS up for debate is whether being a hero is the 'best' option.

Yes, but in ME it's pretty obvious that it is... unfortunately it is obvious. It should not be. 

[David7204]

From what I've heard about the Witcher, everything goes to hell no matter what. The world is full of corrupt, selfish, evil characters no matter what.

Is that fun? To have my intent as a player utterly nullified because the world is full of people not worth caring about?

[David7204]

It should not be obvious that heroism is meaningful?

Or heroism should not be meaningful at all?

[David7204]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

David7204 wrote...

What 'outside influence' is there in the system now?

Paragon/Renegade points.

Don't apply labels to our actions. No silly meters. Don't add add angry red scars to the character's face because they believe the Genophage stopped the Krogan from conquering the galaxy, or that the Quarians deserve to go home. These are supposed to be morally-complex, contentious issues. Lay out the facts before us, and let us make our own judgements without that outside push.

These issues have a clear heroic path, label or no label.

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

From what I've heard about the Witcher, everything goes to hell no matter what. The world is full of corrupt, selfish, evil characters no matter what.

Is that fun? To have my intent as a player utterly nullified because the world is full of people not worth caring about?

Sometimes things don't work out the way you expect them to. That's half the fun. I find I like the dialogue dynamic of Deus Ex more than Mass Effect, because there isn't a morality bar hanging over my head judging me - and I DON'T know that altruism will always pay off.

[k.lalh]

David7204 wrote...

From what I've heard about the Witcher, everything goes to hell no matter what. The world is full of corrupt, selfish, evil characters no matter what.

Is that fun? To have my intent as a player utterly nullified because the world is full of people not worth caring about?

I think some sort of balance would be ideal, don't you? Why copy Witcher?

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

David7204 wrote...

What 'outside influence' is there in the system now?

Paragon/Renegade points.

Don't apply labels to our actions. No silly meters. Don't add add angry red scars to the character's face because they believe the Genophage stopped the Krogan from conquering the galaxy, or that the Quarians deserve to go home. These are supposed to be morally-complex, contentious issues. Lay out the facts before us, and let us make our own judgements without that outside push.

These issues have a clear heroic path, label or no label.

And you're free to follow the path you see fit. Mine would likely not match yours.

I watched Wrex's chief scientist burn a man alive not thirty feet from his throne. I watched a salarian being tossed in a varren pit before him. I've been shot at by mindless Krogan mercenaries more times than I can count and listened to them speak wistfully of retribution for the Genophage. And I'm supposed to believe that every pro-Krogan option is heroic?

The Geth killed 99% of the Quarian population in the space of a year and never answered for it. They killed anyone who approached them for centuries, and are now working for the Reapers. And I'm supposed to believe that every pro-Geth option is heroic?

Drop the morality bar. Let us decide right from wrong without scarring our faces for disagreeing with the writing team, and let us live with the consequences of the actions we choose.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 30 janvier 2013 - 07:33 .

[David7204]

Yes, making the compassionate choice is, by definition, heroic. The question is not whether it's the heroic choice, but whether it's the best choice.

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

Yes, making the compassionate choice is, by definition, heroic. The question is not whether it's the heroic choice, but whether it's the best choice.

Compassion... towards whom? The Krogan inflicted with the genophage, or the Turian whose home said Krogan has vowed to burn?