416 réponses à ce sujet

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

It's a more compelling moral question for the player when they know blind faith won't consistently be rewarded.

Catch-22's are more interesting than floating along, confident in the knowledge that nothing bad will ever come of doing the same thing every time. One of my most interesting ME2 playthroughs had Shepard sacrifice half of the Normandy crew to prevent the Batarian bombing of Watson - stopping the immediate threat of the missiles and saving the colony took priority over an immediate rescue of the crew. Likewise, one of my most interesting ME3 playthroughs of the Genophage arc had both Wreav and Eve alive.

Both situations are avoidable, but (IMO) it's more interesting when such things happen than when they don't.

First of all, it's not 'blind faith.' It's just faith. Again, we have that irritating implication that players who want to be good are naive and stupid and 'sleepwalking.'

Second of all, let me ask you something. When was the last time you watched any kind of action movie and the main character was killed in a low-level fight with mooks 30 minutes in?

We're not watching an action movie. We're playing a game which claims to be about choice and consequences. Shepard can die on Eden Prime - but because this is a game, we then load back to an earlier save and give it another shot.

And yes, there is blind faith. For example, in a pure-paragon playthrough, even Legion questions your consistent support for the Geth in light of their actions and tamps Shepard's enthusiasm down ("Damn it, the Geth are better than this!" "No. We are not."). Pure paragon trusts Wreav. Again, 92% cure the genophage, 64% with Weav in charge. Would they be doing this if telling Wreav about the sabotage in the truck, thus removing the option later to sabotage the cure, didn't give them "nice guy" points? These are not good things - the game acknowledges this in discussion of the consequences. Would people be so quick to destroy the Collector base if the decision weren't colored by the karma meter? To let the rock-dropping terrorist walk free? To side with or against Cerberus in the face of the Council's lethargy? I for one would be interested to see how peoples' actions and stances would change without that influence; without scarring the player's face for choosing the "wrong" side. Uncolored by a karma meter, to whom do you choose to show compassion? The Krogan inflicted with the genophage, or the Turian whose home said Krogan has vowed to burn?

Paragon is not consistent - it tells you who to trust, who not to trust, who to sympathize with, who to chew out, who to forgive, who to abandon to a fire, who to pistol-whip...

Renegade is not consistent - it tells you who to trust, who not to trust, who to sympathize with, who to chew out, who to agree with, who to salute, who to shove out a window...

I say, get rid of them. Leave the actions and words in there, but let people decide for themselves what's right and wrong without their own decision-making being literally colored by somebody else's judgement, and let them come here and debate the merits of their choices with their own reasoning.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 05 juin 2013 - 02:15 .

[David7204]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

You've invoked a fallacy. You're now equating action to an opinion. That's false.

Not every action is reconcilable with those of others. But that doesn't make the idea behind it any less valid. There's a lot of variables to account for in determining a person's ideals and opinions.

What exactly do you think actions are derived from if not ideas and opinions?

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

You've invoked a fallacy. You're now equating action to an opinion. That's false.

Not every action is reconcilable with those of others. But that doesn't make the idea behind it any less valid. There's a lot of variables to account for in determining a person's ideals and opinions.

What exactly do you think actions are derived from if not ideas and opinions?

Can you have a dark or evil or irreconcilable or unorthodox opinion? Yes.

But you hold the ability to act on that opinion, making it an action. You don't have to act on an opinion.

[Steelcan]

One rachni queen might not be a threat, but the billions she could breed? Sorry, but I do not think Napoleon should have been left free after Waterloo.

And what makes you think Balak got lucky? Hijacking an astetoid does not seem spur of the moment to me.

[AresKeith]

Steelcan wrote...

One rachni queen might not be a threat, but the billions she could breed? Sorry, but I do not think Napoleon should have been left free after Waterloo.

And what makes you think Balak got lucky? Hijacking an astetoid does not seem spur of the moment to me.

I would've agreed with you about the Rachni if Bioware didn't do the whole Indoctrinated part, but I do agree with the oversight

[David7204]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Can you have a dark or evil or irreconcilable or unorthodox opinion? Yes.

But you hold the ability to act on that opinion, making it an action. You don't have to act on an opinion.

So let me get this straight.

All opinions and ideas are equal because everything is subjective. (maybe you should stop swinging your little stick and calling them 'evil') Nobody gets to decide which ones are best.

But actions are not equal. Some actions are bad, and that's the end of it. And if you do a bad action, such as shooting you in the face and stealing your money,  you need to be punished.

That about right?

Modifié par David7204, 05 juin 2013 - 02:13 .

[Dextro Milk]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 LOL... this is a funny thread.

I know I'm lol'ing pretty hard; partially because of David, and partially because of the fact that there's some guy in the thread called "Dextro Milk".

Much better than the Levo Milk. 

[David7204]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

I say, get rid of them. Leave the actions and words in there, but let people decide for themselves what's right and wrong without their own decision-making being literally colored by somebody else's judgement, and let them come here and debate the merits of their choices with their own reasoning.

Did you miss what I said earlier about messages being embedded in the narrative? About things much deeper than points and bars?

Modifié par David7204, 05 juin 2013 - 02:14 .

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

People will be able to exploit any system once they know the mechanics of it. That's the bottom line. Some people are better at persuading and intimidating people than others are. That is why I advocate allocating skill points for this skill. Now you're going to say "But that takes away from the consequences of your decisions."

No. Use both systems. I also advocate a "karma" system in addition. And I advocate a reputation system in addition to that. They're thinking of making the next ME more open space so the more side missions you do, the higher your reputation for good or ill with various factions.

Basically being a smooth talker will get you far, but it will only get you so far. Your actions will get you the rest of the way. But actions alone will not cut it either. We know that to be true in our own world.

I think they should have speech, a karma system, reputation, and factions.

Perfect, no. Complicated, yes.

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

I say, get rid of them. Leave the actions and words in there, but let people decide for themselves what's right and wrong without their own decision-making being literally colored by somebody else's judgement, and let them come here and debate the merits of their choices with their own reasoning.

Did you miss what I said earlier about messages being embedded in the narrative? About things much deeper than points and bars?

I'm talking about the points and the bars here, not the messages. People cure the genophage with Wreav because telling him about the sabotage in the truck (and thus eliminating the option to talk down Mordin from curing it for him later on) is a paragon choice.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 05 juin 2013 - 02:17 .

[David7204]

The Mad Hanar wrote...

Well, yeah. Thinking "I wanna kill that guy" and actually killing him are pretty different.

One is a harmless expression of anger or frustration with someone, and another is an extreme action taken when there were plenty of other actions to take.

So shooting you in the face and stealing your money is bad because...why? Who says so?

[David7204]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

I'm talking about the points and the bars here, not the messages.

Are you sure about that? Because the decision is absolutely still going to be 'colored by somebody else's judgement' in that case.

Modifié par David7204, 05 juin 2013 - 02:17 .

[dreamgazer]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Dextro Milk wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...

 LOL... this is a funny thread.

I know I'm lol'ing pretty hard; partially because of David, and partially because of the fact that there's some guy in the thread called "Dextro Milk".

Much better than the Levo Milk. 

Suddenly I wonder which the shifty-looking cow is.

Depends on the time of day. 

[Lars10178]

I want ME2s paragon/renegade, but make the renegade toned down a little so its not just bad choice/good choice. They need neutral responses back

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

I'm talking about the points and the bars here, not the messages.

Are you sure about that? Because the decision is absolutely still going to be 'colored by somebody else's judgement' in that case.

Yes. Exhibit A: thread title.

[Dextro Milk]

dreamgazer wrote...

Depends on the time of day. 

Indeed... 

[Ravensword]

David! My favorite user. How are you today, good ser?

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Can you have a dark or evil or irreconcilable or unorthodox opinion? Yes.

But you hold the ability to act on that opinion, making it an action. You don't have to act on an opinion.

So let me get this straight.

All opinions and ideas are equal because everything is subjective. (maybe you should stop swinging your little stick and calling them 'evil') Nobody gets to decide which ones are best.

But actions are not equal. Some actions are bad, and that's the end of it. And if you do a bad action, such as shooting you in the face and stealing your money,  you need to be punished.

That about right?

Actions can be subjective. You're going to try and twist this and say that by punishing an action, I'm breaking the subjectiveness of the action as another person might see it. I can already see where you're going to go with this.

It's a moral grey area. 

But the action you've dictated is pretty straightforward. You're killing a person and taking their money. Why? Because you want their money? 

That really wasn't necessary, now was it? 

Why'd you do it David? You're a murderer. Why'd you murder that person David?

[Dextro Milk]

Ravensword wrote...

David! My favorite user. How are you today, good ser?

The sarcasm, I think I see it. 

[David7204]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

Yes. Exhibit A: thread title.

Okay. Just to be absolutely clear. You're admitting that a choice being 'colored by somebody else's judgement' is not a problem at all?

Modifié par David7204, 05 juin 2013 - 02:20 .

[Dextro Milk]

David7204 wrote...

So, if I want to drink a glass of milk, but you want to dump it in the sink, are you wrong to want to rob me of drinking my milk? Or do you think that my right to drink milk trumps your right to dump it?