174 réponses à ce sujet

[Dunabar]

Hmm could make peace between the Quarians and Geth, lie to yourself saying that the Quarians managed to bring the Geth back under control (aka make Daro'Xen happy), and later feel no guilt for destroying them along with the Reapers lol.

[remydat]

Stormcutter wrote...

So I just killed the Geth. Not because I didn't fulfill the requirements for peace (The Rally the fleet and Warn the Fleet option were sitting there high and proud), but because saving them felt pointless. I know that I'm going to choose Destroy, which will annihilate them, and I've got plenty War Assets for the best ending. And I can't stand the other endings. Either 'Reaper-Godking' or 'Transhumanism For All'? Not my cup of tea.

Saving them would have felt dirty. Like I was just using them for a bit, before wiping them out. It's like it was a species-wide Hope Spot. It's annoying, because I actually prefer the Geth to the Quarian's on a moral scale. But if they're going to die anyway, why bother? I might as well kill them when they're not true AI's, incapable of truly 'fearing' the end that comes for them.

Anybody else ever feel like this?

If you are going to make a decision by looking ahead and saying well the Geth die in Destroy then you are metagaming.  If you are metagaming then you have already decided to break the role playing aspect of trying to make decisions in your role as Shepard so there is no point in continuing the pretense that your are role playing.

So there is no reason to feel sad when these are just fictional characters.  There is also no reason to think of the other endings as Reaper God-King or Transhumanism for all since you know from those endings that everyone appears fine with either of those endings.  No one complains that Shep is a Reaper God or that they feel upset that Synthesis was decided for them so what would be the point in making a decision on that basis when you have already decided to metagame the endings?

So I think Phatose already alluded to this but don't half ass it.  Either metagame in which case none of your decisions really matter one way or the other because it is just a game or role play in which case you should be making the decision on the basis you are unaware of the endings.

Modifié par remydat, 21 mai 2013 - 09:32 .

[Dabrikishaw]

I know where you're coming from, but instead of picking the Quarians because the Geth will always die in Destroy, I pick the Quarians to kill first.

Modifié par Dabrikishaw, 21 mai 2013 - 09:46 .

[KaiserShep]

remydat wrote...
If you are going to make a decision by looking ahead and saying well the Geth die in Destroy then you are metagaming.  If you are metagaming then you have already decided to break the role playing aspect of trying to make decisions in your role as Shepard so there is no point in continuing the pretense that your are role playing. 

So there is no reason to feel sad when these are just fictional characters.  There is also no reason to think of the other endings as Reaper God-King or Transhumanism for all since you know from those endings that everyone appears fine with either of those endings.  No one complains that Shep is a Reaper God or that they feel upset that Synthesis was decided for them so what would be the point in making a decision on that basis when you have already decided to metagame the endings?

So I think Phatose already alluded to this but don't half ass it.  Either metagame in which case none of your decisions really matter one way or the other because it is just a game or role play in which case you should be making the decision on the basis you are unaware of the endings.

This is how I feel about it also. I always save the geth, and befriend Legion, which does add bitterness to the decision, but it doesn't matter. I well exceed my requirement for the "best" ending, but I can't bring myself to kill the geth, because I really didn't want them to die anyway. If that only delays the inevitable, so be it, but it kind of kills the effect to act in anticipation of the ending. 

[remydat]

KaiserShep wrote...

This is how I feel about it also. I always save the geth, and befriend Legion, which does add bitterness to the decision, but it doesn't matter. I well exceed my requirement for the "best" ending, but I can't bring myself to kill the geth, because I really didn't want them to die anyway. If that only delays the inevitable, so be it, but it kind of kills the effect to act in anticipation of the ending. 

That's fair enough.  I choose synthesis or control but to each his/her own.

[Erez Kristal]

KaiserShep wrote...

remydat wrote...
If you are going to make a decision by looking ahead and saying well the Geth die in Destroy then you are metagaming.  If you are metagaming then you have already decided to break the role playing aspect of trying to make decisions in your role as Shepard so there is no point in continuing the pretense that your are role playing. 

So there is no reason to feel sad when these are just fictional characters.  There is also no reason to think of the other endings as Reaper God-King or Transhumanism for all since you know from those endings that everyone appears fine with either of those endings.  No one complains that Shep is a Reaper God or that they feel upset that Synthesis was decided for them so what would be the point in making a decision on that basis when you have already decided to metagame the endings?

So I think Phatose already alluded to this but don't half ass it.  Either metagame in which case none of your decisions really matter one way or the other because it is just a game or role play in which case you should be making the decision on the basis you are unaware of the endings.

This is how I feel about it also. I always save the geth, and befriend Legion, which does add bitterness to the decision, but it doesn't matter. I well exceed my requirement for the "best" ending, but I can't bring myself to kill the geth, because I really didn't want them to die anyway. If that only delays the inevitable, so be it, but it kind of kills the effect to act in anticipation of the ending. 

I wouldnt call it saving... i like to see it as i always use the geth no matters what. and the thing that troubles me most is those idiotic quarrian destroying all of my valuable war assests bosthas!

[Stormcutter]

remydat wrote...

Stormcutter wrote...

So I just killed the Geth. Not because I didn't fulfill the requirements for peace (The Rally the fleet and Warn the Fleet option were sitting there high and proud), but because saving them felt pointless. I know that I'm going to choose Destroy, which will annihilate them, and I've got plenty War Assets for the best ending. And I can't stand the other endings. Either 'Reaper-Godking' or 'Transhumanism For All'? Not my cup of tea.

Saving them would have felt dirty. Like I was just using them for a bit, before wiping them out. It's like it was a species-wide Hope Spot. It's annoying, because I actually prefer the Geth to the Quarian's on a moral scale. But if they're going to die anyway, why bother? I might as well kill them when they're not true AI's, incapable of truly 'fearing' the end that comes for them.

Anybody else ever feel like this?

If you are going to make a decision by looking ahead and saying well the Geth die in Destroy then you are metagaming.  If you are metagaming then you have already decided to break the role playing aspect of trying to make decisions in your role as Shepard so there is no point in continuing the pretense that your are role playing.

So there is no reason to feel sad when these are just fictional characters.  There is also no reason to think of the other endings as Reaper God-King or Transhumanism for all since you know from those endings that everyone appears fine with either of those endings.  No one complains that Shep is a Reaper God or that they feel upset that Synthesis was decided for them so what would be the point in making a decision on that basis when you have already decided to metagame the endings?

So I think Phatose already alluded to this but don't half ass it.  Either metagame in which case none of your decisions really matter one way or the other because it is just a game or role play in which case you should be making the decision on the basis you are unaware of the endings.

So did you tually read any of my other posts? Because right now, I'm getting the impression that you just read the first post and maybe one or two others on the front page, then jumped right to page 7.

 The decision I made was perfectly within my Shepard's character as I was roleplaying. This was just me expressing a personal frustration, rather than the main reason why I did it.

Modifié par Stormcutter, 21 mai 2013 - 10:53 .

[remydat]

Stormcutter wrote...

So did you tually read any of my other posts? Because right now, I'm getting the impression that you just read the first post and maybe one or two others on the front page, then jumped right to page 7.

 The decision I made was perfectly within my Shepard's character as I was roleplaying. This was just me expressing a personal frustration, rather than the main reason why I did it.

Yeah, I get that but I was just saying your personal frustration is logically inconsistent.  Either you made the decision as a roleplayer or you made the decision as a metagamer.  Using a metagame argument to express personal frustration over a role playing decision is making an apples to oranges comparison.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

You can only truly role play the decisions your first time through anyway, but then you know the dialogue wheel means upper right = paragon = good = nice; bottom right = renegade = bad = ass, so you can make your decisions that way too.

When I played TW2 the first time I let the "bad guy" go in the end because there were far worse villains in the world, and he'd saved Triss for Geralt and he had vodka. So.... drink up and off with you.

[AlanC9]

remydat wrote...


Yeah, I get that but I was just saying your personal frustration is logically inconsistent.  Either you made the decision as a roleplayer or you made the decision as a metagamer.  Using a metagame argument to express personal frustration over a role playing decision is making an apples to oranges comparison.

As I read it he was shaping Shepard into someone who would make an RP decision that would make the ending better for himself. Metagame-guided role playing?

[Megaton_Hope]

Redbelle wrote...

shodiswe wrote...

Maybe the only Geth survivors in destroy are those in Quarian suits

As long as they stay out of Tali's suit...... My shep can't perform with an audience.

EDI, what's this part of the ship?

[Stormcutter]

remydat wrote...

Stormcutter wrote...

So did you tually read any of my other posts? Because right now, I'm getting the impression that you just read the first post and maybe one or two others on the front page, then jumped right to page 7.

 The decision I made was perfectly within my Shepard's character as I was roleplaying. This was just me expressing a personal frustration, rather than the main reason why I did it.

Yeah, I get that but I was just saying your personal frustration is logically inconsistent.  Either you made the decision as a roleplayer or you made the decision as a metagamer.  Using a metagame argument to express personal frustration over a role playing decision is making an apples to oranges comparison.

Are you capable of erasing your memories everytime you complete the game? No? Then congratulations, you're metagaming. That's a simple fact. You know things that the game hasn't shown you yet. You know where the quests are. You know when you're going to get certain weapons. You know when you're going to meet certain characters. And consciously or not, your experience will be altered by that.

I made the decision in-game, based on my Shepards not trusting the Geth when push came to shove, even when peace was a possibility (not that my Shepard would know that- no magic vision to see a choice screen). I realised after, when thinking about it, that this was probably the best choice I could have made, given that I'm going for Destroy.

Also this idea you have that you can't care about the characters if you metagame is, bluntly, stupid. Many players use their meta-knowledge to guide their Shepard to a more complete ending, while maintaining their roleplay.

AlanC9 wrote...
As I read it he was shaping Shepard into someone who would make an RP decision that would make the ending better for himself. Metagame-guided role playing?

This guy pretty much has it.

Modifié par Stormcutter, 22 mai 2013 - 02:35 .

[BronzTrooper]

Great. Another one of these threads.

Ah well, might as well state my opinion.

If I had to choose between the Quarians and the Geth I'd go Quarians every time (mainly because of Tali and she always makes it into ME3). That said, I still go for peace even if I'm gonna go for Destroy later on. I even go for peace when I'm playing Renegade (I always go for Control with my Renegades cause I see it as a Renegade choice). If I'm playing through with a romance I've already done before then I go Synthesis (Paragons only).

[Stormcutter]

Edit

Modifié par Stormcutter, 22 mai 2013 - 02:34 .

[AresKeith]

Did Wulf come back yet?

[remydat]

Stormcutter wrote...

Are you capable of erasing your memories everytime you complete the game? No? Then congratulations, you're metagaming. That's a simple fact. You know things that the game hasn't shown you yet. You know where the quests are. You know when you're going to get certain weapons. You know when you're going to meet certain characters. And consciously or not, your experience will be altered by that.

I made the decision in-game, based on my Shepards not trusting the Geth when push came to shove, even when peace was a possibility (not that my Shepard would know that- no magic vision to see a choice screen). I realised after, when thinking about it, that this was probably the best choice I could have made, given that I'm going for Destroy.

Also this idea you have that you can't care about the characters if you metagame is, bluntly, stupid. Many players use their meta-knowledge to guide their Shepard to a more complete ending, while maintaining their roleplay.

Whether I can erase the memories or not is irrelevant.  I can choose not to consider it in my subsequent playthroughs.  When a jury hears something in a court room and a lawyer moves to have it stricten from the record, the jury can no longer use it as evidence to reach a conclusion.  Of course, some jurors may likely still use it but most reasonable jurors trying to operate within the law will in fact ignore it despite being aware of it.

And I didn't say you can't care.  Humans can make decisions based on logic or emotion.  I simply said it was logically incosistent and apples vs oranges.  Decisions based on emotion are often not logicially consistent.  Doesn't mean you can't have them.

And I use metagame knowledge to guide Shep as well but when doing so it is not because I am being logical or trying to role play.  It is because I simple want to finish the game quickly, rack up achievements, or obtain the best ending from a game perspective.

[Stormcutter]

remydat wrote...

Stormcutter wrote...

Are you capable of erasing your memories everytime you complete the game? No? Then congratulations, you're metagaming. That's a simple fact. You know things that the game hasn't shown you yet. You know where the quests are. You know when you're going to get certain weapons. You know when you're going to meet certain characters. And consciously or not, your experience will be altered by that.

I made the decision in-game, based on my Shepards not trusting the Geth when push came to shove, even when peace was a possibility (not that my Shepard would know that- no magic vision to see a choice screen). I realised after, when thinking about it, that this was probably the best choice I could have made, given that I'm going for Destroy.

Also this idea you have that you can't care about the characters if you metagame is, bluntly, stupid. Many players use their meta-knowledge to guide their Shepard to a more complete ending, while maintaining their roleplay.

Whether I can erase the memories or not is irrelevant.  I can choose not to consider it in my subsequent playthroughs.  When a jury hears something in a court room and a lawyer moves to have it stricten from the record, the jury can no longer use it as evidence to reach a conclusion.  Of course, some jurors may likely still use it but most reasonable jurors trying to operate within the law will in fact ignore it despite being aware of it.

And I didn't say you can't care.  Humans can make decisions based on logic or emotion.  I simply said it was logically incosistent and apples vs oranges.  Decisions based on emotion are often not logicially consistent.  Doesn't mean you can't have them.

And I use metagame knowledge to guide Shep as well but when doing so it is not because I am being logical or trying to role play.  It is because I simple want to finish the game quickly, rack up achievements, or obtain the best ending from a game perspective.

You really can't completely disregard. It's little things, like remembering to pick up the Viper sniper rifle in Thane's mission, or hesitating because you know you missed a quest item earlier in the level. If you ignore that knowledge, then all you're doing is missing a weapon or an upgrade. There's nothing wrong with that and I'm certainly not attacking you here. It's just the simple fact that you can't play a game for the first time twice.

And it's fine that that's what you're doing with your metagame information. I just don't see why you have a problem with me guiding my Shepard with meta knowledge to get an ending that I consider the best possible for my story. I might be putting a bit too much thought into it, but that's just my preference.

Modifié par Stormcutter, 22 mai 2013 - 03:58 .

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

AresKeith wrote...

Did Wulf come back yet?

We can only hope.

[S.A.K]

remydat wrote...

Stormcutter wrote...

So I just killed the Geth. Not because I didn't fulfill the requirements for peace (The Rally the fleet and Warn the Fleet option were sitting there high and proud), but because saving them felt pointless. I know that I'm going to choose Destroy, which will annihilate them, and I've got plenty War Assets for the best ending. And I can't stand the other endings. Either 'Reaper-Godking' or 'Transhumanism For All'? Not my cup of tea.

Saving them would have felt dirty. Like I was just using them for a bit, before wiping them out. It's like it was a species-wide Hope Spot. It's annoying, because I actually prefer the Geth to the Quarian's on a moral scale. But if they're going to die anyway, why bother? I might as well kill them when they're not true AI's, incapable of truly 'fearing' the end that comes for them.

Anybody else ever feel like this?

If you are going to make a decision by looking ahead and saying well the Geth die in Destroy then you are metagaming.  If you are metagaming then you have already decided to break the role playing aspect of trying to make decisions in your role as Shepard so there is no point in continuing the pretense that your are role playing.

So there is no reason to feel sad when these are just fictional characters.  There is also no reason to think of the other endings as Reaper God-King or Transhumanism for all since you know from those endings that everyone appears fine with either of those endings.  No one complains that Shep is a Reaper God or that they feel upset that Synthesis was decided for them so what would be the point in making a decision on that basis when you have already decided to metagame the endings?

So I think Phatose already alluded to this but don't half ass it.  Either metagame in which case none of your decisions really matter one way or the other because it is just a game or role play in which case you should be making the decision on the basis you are unaware of the endings.

I agree with you on this one. Even in my first run I made peace and I didn't have a clue about the ending. But in the end I picked Destroy. I always felt bad about EDI but never about the Geth. Only reason I made peace on Rannoch is that throwing the Geth at the Reapers would save more lives.
If Destroy would kill some other species that I feel like worth saving (this include most species other than Geth), I would not choose Destroy.

[remydat]

There is a big difference between the little things that are a function of the game. For example, in real life, I wouldn't be looking around in every nook and cranny expecting to find credits or guns or random medi gel when I am on a mission. I do that because I know it is a game. However, that is quite different than trying to make moral decisions based from an in-universe perspective.  From a role play perspective, I only pick Control or Synthesis because morally I can't pick Destroy.  From a metagame perspective, that is the only time I pick Destroy because morals don't matter when you are metagaming.  It is just a game and the 3 choices are just 3 different options.

And again, I never said I have a problem with it. You asked if anyone else felt like you did. I was simply explaining to you why I don't feel that way.

Modifié par remydat, 22 mai 2013 - 04:23 .

[DeinonSlayer]

remydat wrote...

There is a big difference between the little things that are a function of the game. For example, in real life, I wouldn't be looking around in every nook and cranny expecting to find credits or guns or random medi gel when I am on a mission. I do that because I know it is a game. However, that is quite different than trying to make moral decisions based from an in-universe perspective.  From a role play perspective, I only pick Control or Synthesis because morally I can't pick Destroy.  From a metagame perspective, that is the only time I pick Destroy because morals don't matter when you are metagaming.  It is just a game and the 3 choices are just 3 different options.

And again, I never said I have a problem with it. You asked if anyone else felt like you did. I was simply explaining to you why I don't feel that way.

A bit off-topic, but this is a good point. I've been focused on DA:O lately, and it was a change to see that characters recognized whether I was running around collecting items I should not have been (example: companions chastize you for taking the time to look for loot in Leliana's Song while escaping a hostile castle, Irving rightly chastizes you as a thief if you take a certain staff from the repository in the Magi origin). Looting almost became a reflex in Mass Effect; in other games, however, there are realistic negative repercussions for doing so.

I understand that one can find themselves being attacked by city guards or denied by merchants depending on what they do in different hubs...

ANYWAY... yes. Realism is good.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 22 mai 2013 - 04:39 .

[remydat]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

A bit off-topic, but this is a good point. I've been focused on DA:O lately, and it was a change to see that characters recognized whether I was running around collecting items I should not have been (example: companions chastize you for taking the time to look for loot in Leliana's Song while escaping a hostile castle, Irving rightly chastizes you as a thief if you take a certain staff from the repository in the Magi origin). Looting almost became a reflex in Mass Effect; in other games, however, there are realistic negative repercussions for doing so.

I understand that one can find themselves being attacked by city guards or denied by merchants depending on what they do in different hubs...

ANYWAY... yes. Realism is good.

Skyrim is like that as well.  You can't even sell stolen goods in regular stores and can only sell them to a thieves guild fence.

Although, most of the time in ME2 and ME3, you are on missions killing bad guys and so it is a merc that istrying to kill you who in theory dropped a gun.  The only time it is really looting is during ME2 where you spefically enter apartments of innocents and chastise some looters only to then do some looting, lol.  Of course, that is really just because you are an amoral bastard and choose to still loot.  Me I am a decent human being so I never loot right after telling those guys not to

[Stormcutter]

remydat wrote...

There is a big difference between the little things that are a function of the game. For example, in real life, I wouldn't be looking around in every nook and cranny expecting to find credits or guns or random medi gel when I am on a mission. I do that because I know it is a game. However, that is quite different than trying to make moral decisions based from an in-universe perspective.  From a role play perspective, I only pick Control or Synthesis because morally I can't pick Destroy.  From a metagame perspective, that is the only time I pick Destroy because morals don't matter when you are metagaming.  It is just a game and the 3 choices are just 3 different options.

And again, I never said I have a problem with it. You asked if anyone else felt like you did. I was simply explaining to you why I don't feel that way.

And that's where I disagree. Even if you're metagaming, morals still matter if you want them to. You're seeing metagaming as simply a means to complete the game faster or more efficiently, rather than a means to get a more satisfying ending for characters you've come to care about. You can do it either way, but don't tell me I can't care about the characters or the repercussions of my choices if I use metagame knowledge, when I've already said that I do care. Right now, you're literally telling me that I'm not allowed to feel what I've already said I feel. So unless I'm misunderstanding you, or you wrote what you did in a way you didn't intend, you're being arrogant beyond belief right now.

And remember, this is Shepard. The guy who manages to ninja Reaper Code from inside the Geth collective. He's taken kleptomania to an art form really.

I should mention that the very first time I played, I still did this exact thing, despite having what I presumed was the peaceful option of Rally the Fleet. Because I thought the game was going to pull a fast one on me and the Geth were going to fall back under Reaper control and be a pain in the ass to deal with. Alas, Bioware failed to live up to expectations on any kind of shocking twist, but I still make the same choice every time.

Modifié par Stormcutter, 22 mai 2013 - 01:00 .

[dublin omega 223]

I choose the Quarians if peace isn't an option after all the Quarian's are people while the Geth are just blinking lights and clockwork and they worked with the Reapers twice.

[DirtyPhoenix]

KiwiQuiche wrote...

Nah, kill the suit-rats then pick Destroy