117 réponses à ce sujet

[essarr71]

HYR 2.0 wrote...
Again, not enough to just agree to disagree?

Oh, I'll agree to disagree (and I forgot the Gavin pistol whip was an interrupt), just pointing out it might not be so cut and dry.

I don't think the backwards gun with zaeed was a bug tho.  Who can be sure tho.


quick edit: I will say that I think the entire system needs to be ditched.  Too many people put too much stock into following a color.  I'd rather every option be white.. and if a system needs to be in place for future unlockable options, make the values/score hidden.  The onus should be placed on what one does with the situation, regardless of color.  I don't pistol whip Archer cause it's the blue thing to do.. I do it cause he deserves it.  I'd still pick it if it was red.  I think there's a knee-jerk reaction to picking these *special* options simply because they're presented differently.  Stop the hand holding and I think you're really going to see some honest, thought-out reactions.

Modifié par essarr71, 12 octobre 2013 - 05:53 .

[Deathsaurer]

No mention of Thane's loyalty mission? Completely unnecessary illegal interrogation, bonus points if you play the bad cop.

[SeptimusMagistos]

Deathsaurer wrote...

No mention of Thane's loyalty mission? Completely unnecessary illegal interrogation, bonus points if you play the bad cop.

If you hold out long enough, his lawyer will get there, at which point you can just explain that since you're a spectre, the interrogation is not, in fact, illegal.

It would have been nice if you could explain this to Bailey.

[Deathsaurer]

I'm aware. I let Thane be the bad cop for that to happen. Buuuuut Shepard didn't bother telling anyone else this at the time so they all assumed what they were doing was illegal and the fact that saying I'm a Spectre got him to squawk makes the entire thing a silly waste of time. Also can't discount the possibility that someone intentionally chose not to get their Spectre status back. I know, it'd be odd for a Paragon but it is possible.

[KwangtungTiger]

essarr71 wrote...

HYR 2.0 wrote...
Again, not enough to just agree to disagree?

Oh, I'll agree to disagree (and I forgot the Gavin pistol whip was an interrupt), just pointing out it might not be so cut and dry.

I don't think the backwards gun with zaeed was a bug tho.  Who can be sure tho.


quick edit: I will say that I think the entire system needs to be ditched.  Too many people put too much stock into following a color.  I'd rather every option be white.. and if a system needs to be in place for future unlockable options, make the values/score hidden.  The onus should be placed on what one does with the situation, regardless of color.  I don't pistol whip Archer cause it's the blue thing to do.. I do it cause he deserves it.  I'd still pick it if it was red.  I think there's a knee-jerk reaction to picking these *special* options simply because they're presented differently.  Stop the hand holding and I think you're really going to see some honest, thought-out reactions.

I think too many players would cry foul if this happened. I truely believe most players need to have their hand held when playing such games. Look at how many people were upset that a certain desicion would add renegade points to a paragon response (This goes back to ME2).

Personally, would love to see this type of system implemented.

[eyezonlyii]

I like the idea above me and I also have this to say: for all of it's other faults, i found the dialogue/reputation system in DA2 to be awesome. i liked the fact that your allies were influenced by your actions and your chosen responses accumulated over time to add a certain personality to Hawke. Maybe they could do something like this in the next ME?

Barring getting rid of the colors though, I would like to see a divorce in what you say and what you do. Something to the effect of what the OP was saying: the ability to chose between a "tyrannical" patagon or a flippant renegade to any and all combos in between.

[AlexMBrennan]

How about telling everyone you recruit in ME2 that they must put differences aside in the name of mutual cooperation, yet you routinely bash Cerberus and TIM (Paragon dialogue options) at the same time -- do as I say, not as I do? What makes Shepard's hate for Cerberus more justified than, say, Jacob's distrust of Thane?

Their differences are imaginary whilst Cerberus really is a terrorist organisation?

Overall though, are you surprised given how morally f@cked up ME2's missions were? Half the time you break into people's property and start murdering their staff because they have something Shepard wants (e.g. Imagine Thane's missions without the guards conveniently shooting workers when Shepard arrived)

at which point you can just explain that since you're a spectre, the interrogation is not, in fact, illegal.

Which is exactly why paragons need to way more reluctant about the Spectre thing - that judge, jury and executioner is more a dystopian idea.

Modifié par AlexMBrennan, 12 octobre 2013 - 07:35 .

[Arcian]

People keep forgetting that being good is not the same thing as being nice.

Modifié par Arcian, 12 octobre 2013 - 07:47 .

[David7204]

I wonder. Am I the only person on this forum who realizes the people who rally the loudest against Bioware and the writers 'telling' them what's right and wrong are the people clearly most dependent on it?

A tragic irony. But an inevitable one.

Let's consider an example. There a few 'hardcore,' for lack of a better word, Renegade players on this forum. And they hate aliens. Any time the topic arises, they make clear their support for humanity. For Cerberus. Their distain for the stupid, ugly, aliens. And these same people universally condemn any 'good' choices and the story in general for supporting such 'good' choices.

Why do they do it?

Because BioWare told them to.

Because BioWare told them that Renegade players hate aliens. And they obeyed. Obediently, without question. They want to be 'renegade,' so they did exactly what BioWare told them 'renegade' was. BioWare told them through the story that Renegade players hate aliens, and so that's what they believe.

Suppose for a moment that the issue never came up in the story. That 'aliens vs. humanity' was a never a theme. That humans and aliens were assumed to be an equal terms from the beginning. Or humans and synthetics - it's the exact same phenomanon. Would this forum this filled with people gleefully rallying against synthetics, against aliens? Of course not.

These people - they're lead around on a leash by BioWare. They hate BioWare, but can only speak the words given to them by BioWare. And that put that leash on of their own free will.

Modifié par David7204, 12 octobre 2013 - 08:15 .

[Ieldra]

ThinkSharp wrote...
Your examples bring up good points, but they're the exceptions to the rule. I think your moral expectations of a Paragon Shepard are too high. Look at it this way: it's not that a Paragon Shepard always does the perfectly right and good thing in every situation--we know that's not true--but that noble idealism is what motivates a Paragon Shep's actions. Obviously that has its own extremes too and frankly it's good that even a paragon sometimes loses his ****. It's called being human.

They're not exceptions. They're the good and bad sides of the same coin. At their best, Paragon Shepard is a noble idealist and Renegade Shepard a cool-headed pragmatist. And their worst, Renegade Shepard is a callous jerk and Paragon Shepard a self-righteous principles zealot.

I recommend not sticking to Paragon or Renegade options for the whole game. Instead, think about the situation and consider which option may be appropriate.

@David:
You actually do not know that. Are the people you're talking about playing Renegade because they tend to project a pro-human mindset into their characters? Or is it as you say, the other way round and they project such a mindset into their characters because it's a common Renegade trait?

Modifié par Ieldra2, 12 octobre 2013 - 08:16 .

[Dieb]

Zaeed's loyality mission is not nearly as stupid as people try to make it sound here.

The message of this scene (the pistol thing is not a bug) essentially is IMO "Okay pal, the soft-hearted fool that you think I am, I can play that way too. But I choose not to, and still stand above you. You should try it. Got it? Good. Here's your gun back, let's go."

It's a language he understands. It might be a stupid example, but that's why they send streetworkers to deal with young criminals instead of priests. I think this way of looking at it helps explaining a lot of paragon Shepard's actions.

Modifié par Baelrahn, 12 octobre 2013 - 08:19 .

[David7204]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@David:
You actually do not know that. Are the people you're talking about playing Renegade because they tend to project a pro-human mindset into their characters? Or is it as you say, the other way round and they project such a mindset into their characters because it's a common Renegade trait?

I do know that.

If they actually believed that aliens and synthetics were bad, there's no way in hell they would ever immerse themselves in science fiction to begin with.

Modifié par David7204, 12 octobre 2013 - 08:21 .

[in it for the lolz]

Paragon Shepards ARE tyrants OP. They like to force their Ideals on to others.

[Ieldra]

Baelrahn wrote...
The point about Zaeed's loyality is not as stupid as people try to make it sound here.

The message of this scene (the pistol thing is not a bug) essentially is IMO "Okay pal, the soft-hearted fool that you think I am, I can play that way too. But I choose not to, and still stand above you. You should try it. Got it? Good. Here's your gun back, let's go."

It's a language he understands. It might be a stupid example, but that's why they send streetworkers to deal with young criminals instead of priests. I think this way of looking at it helps explaining a lot of paragon Shepard's actions.

Some of Paragon Shepard's actions are in the "good is not nice" category. I approve of that and share your interpretation of the scene with Zaeed, but it doesn't always work that way. The way you treat Gavin Archer in ME3 if you play Paragon is a better example of what I wouldn't expect a Paragon Shepard to do.

[in it for the lolz]

Ieldra2 wrote...

@David:
You actually do not know that. Are the people you're talking about playing Renegade because they tend to project a pro-human mindset into their characters? Or is it as you say, the other way round and they project such a mindset into their characters because it's a common Renegade trait?

Davey is just butthurt because that Paragon Shepard's are being compared to tyrants (Which is true).

[shodiswe]

Shepard is the representative of Council law and interests.
Shepards job is to enforce the laws and interests of the council and the people of the galaxy that they represent, not nessesarily in that same order.

Some people will requier more than a nice talking to, to get your point across.

Also that occational "Charm" that people are sometiems concerned about.. Commes from power.

Basicly, Shepard is a Judge Dread, but Shepard can choose how to "correct" people, and people know Shepard can "shoot" them. Throw them out a window or lock them in for the resto of their misserable lives if they object.
Judge, hury and executioner.

If Judge dread were to give you a stern talking to, would you accept it or would you resist and ask for the honor of getting shot, arrested or replaced?

Modifié par shodiswe, 12 octobre 2013 - 08:28 .

[Sir DeLoria]

Xilizhra wrote...

Then there was the classic:
*Cures the Genophage in violation of every Council directive EVER*
...followed by...
*Chews out Admiral Raan for violating the Treaty of Farixen, which doesn't apply to the Quarians to begin with*

The former had an actual good reason behind it, in addition to not recklessly endangering civilians by virtue of its mere existence, as strapping huge guns and nothing else onto liveships did.

Great to see that independent thinking at work, Xil.

It's hardly my fault that the Paragon system matches what I believe anyway.

Yeah, the Geth have a long history of blowing up any ship that enters the Veil, armed or not. Arming the ships was smart, the Geth would've targeted them anyway.

Is the Paragon system really unflawed and 100% correct in your eyes? I play mostly Paragon too, but occasionally the neutral or Renegade responses are far better. Do you really believe in making Javik commit suicide for example?

[David7204]

Great men impose their ideals on others by their very existence.

[in it for the lolz]

David7204 wrote...

Great men impose their ideals on others by their very existence.

So your saying that Hitler was a "great man" then?

[David7204]

You don't have a very good grasp of logic, do you?

If A leads to B, B does not imply A.

[Arcian]

David7204 wrote...

I wonder. Am I the only person on this forum who realizes the people who rally the loudest against Bioware and the writers 'telling' them what's right and wrong are the people clearly most dependent on it?

A tragic irony. But an inevitable one.

Let's consider an example. There a few 'hardcore,' for lack of a better word, Renegade players on this forum. And they hate aliens. Any time the topic arises, they make clear their support for humanity. For Cerberus. Their distain for the stupid, ugly, aliens. And these same people universally condemn any 'good' choices and the story in general for supporting such 'good' choices.

Why do they do it?

Because BioWare told them to.

Because BioWare told them that Renegade players hate aliens. And they obeyed. Obediently, without question. They want to be 'renegade,' so they did exactly what BioWare told them 'renegade' was. BioWare told them through the story that Renegade players hate aliens, and so that's what they believe.

Suppose for a moment that the issue never came up in the story. That 'aliens vs. humanity' was a never a theme. That humans and aliens were assumed to be an equal terms from the beginning. Or humans and synthetics - it's the exact same phenomanon. Would this forum this filled with people gleefully rallying against synthetics, against aliens? Of course not.

These people - they're lead around on a leash by BioWare. They hate BioWare, but can only speak the words given to them by BioWare. And that put that leash on of their own free will.

Or it's because they are uneducated Americans suckered by the country's ludicrously corrupt educational system into subscribing to Ayn Rand's newsletter and truly believing in the asinine notion that altruism is the source of all evil in the world.

[shodiswe]

David7204 wrote...

Great men impose their ideals on others by their very existence.

Also, Shepard speaks with the authority of the Citadel council. It's part of being a Spectre and a revered hero, until the Council says otherwise. This is why Shepard can show up pretty much anywhere and people obey or defer to Shepards judgements.

[David7204]

Who are you talking about Arcian? Are you talking about the 'hardcore' Renegade players and posters on this forum I was talking about?

[Arcian]

David7204 wrote...

Who are you talking about Arcian? Are you talking about the 'hardcore' Renegade players and posters on this forum I was talking about?

Yeah, the same guys who starts feverishly thumping Atlas Shrugged every time someone dares imply Cerberus may be acting on questionable morals.

[in it for the lolz]

David7204 wrote...

You don't have a very good grasp of logic, do you?

If A leads to B, B does not imply A.

I have a great grasp of logic (nonlike yourself). *Next thing you will be saying is that droping a nuke on a city full of none combatants (whos country is at with your own) is a good idea*.

*I bet that you dont know what I am talking at