195 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

The authoritative tones in Control are tricky, in that even the paragon version looks like this:

[Deathsaurer]

People still revere The Shepard no matter what ending you pick. Let it go dude.

[KaiserShep]

dreamgazer wrote...

The authoritative tones in Control are tricky, in that even the paragon version looks like this:

I'll always maintain that in this scenario, there would be an underground faction of disgruntled people from all species that oppose the presence of the reapers, benevolent or not. 

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

Laughable. All stories have themes, Deinon.

Of course all stories have themes. Should a player be able to mindlessly spam their way through the narrative, clicking the same spot on the wheel, barely conscious to what they're choosing to do and with no introspection on why they're doing it, though?



I say it's better to arrange dialogue options in a way that forces them to stop and consider their actions.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 11 décembre 2013 - 03:33 .

[CosmicGnosis]

KaiserShep wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

The authoritative tones in Control are tricky, in that even the paragon version looks like this:

I'll always maintain that in this scenario, there would be an underground faction of disgruntled people from all species that oppose the presence of the reapers, benevolent or not. 

Why can't Shepard just speak through the Reapers and explain what is happening? Maybe he could ask the galaxy what they think about the Reapers' presence?

[MassivelyEffective0730]

I dislike having to choose options because they're paragon or renegade, or because 'they're the morally right/good/heroic or wrong/bad/evil thing to do.

That's why I don't like morality systems. They're useless to people who play as moral/ethical relativists and nihilists (such as myself).

I not only don't want the game to tell me what's morally right or wrong, I don't want the game to implement a concept of right or wrong on an external level. People who want to feel good about being good can still do it (though I believe that decisions should always have a grey-and-gray feel.)

Make the consequences ambiguous. I like games that aren't clear-cut on what's good and what's bad, games that make the player think about what is the most appropriate course of action and whatnot.

So to answer the question, I would have chosen Destroy regardless of whether or not it was the paragon or renegade thing to do.

Same with the CB.

I destroy the CB, but I utterly despise that 'I won't let fear compromise who I am' bull****.

I'd just as soon say 'I won't let who my principles compromise my goals.'

My goals are my principles.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 11 décembre 2013 - 03:44 .

[David7204]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Laughable. All stories have themes, Deinon.

Of course all stories have themes. Should a player be able to mindlessly spam their way through the narrative, clicking the same spot on the wheel, barely conscious to what they're choosing to do and with no introspection on why they're doing it, though?

I say it's better to arrange dialogue options in a way that forces them to stop and consider their actions.

That really has nothing to do with you implying people who welcomes themes are stupid earlier.

For big choices? Fine. I wouldn't care.

For small dialogue? No. It's irriating and pointless. I don't want to hunt around on the dialogue wheel constantly just to be polite to a friend. Nor do I want to choose options that aren't ideally paraphrased and accidently be rude. I don't sit around for five minutes at every dialogue option wondering if I should choose to be polite or not.

So for 95% of dialogue? No. It's a very poor idea.

Modifié par David7204, 11 décembre 2013 - 03:41 .

[Hazegurl]

as a Renegade player I'm glad destroy was the renegade option although I still would have chosen it if it were Paragon.

[dreamgazer]

CosmicGnosis wrote...

Why can't Shepard just speak through the Reapers and explain what is happening? Maybe he could ask the galaxy what they think about the Reapers' presence?

You expect this inquiry to go well? Remember what the Reapers, willingly or unwillingly controlled, did to the galaxy. 

That goes beyond mere moving beyond the differences created during human warfare. 

[JamesFaith]

CosmicGnosis wrote...

Why can't Shepard just speak through the Reapers and explain what is happening? Maybe he could ask the galaxy what they think about the Reapers' presence?

It would be quite difficult to get some other answer then "DIE!!!!!" when such Reapers would mostly stand in the middle of burning cities surrounded by corpses and husks from our relatives and friends.

[Sion1138]

Allowing Legion to upload the code was a renegade option.

[Steelcan]

Sion1138 wrote...

Allowing Legion to upload the code was a renegade option.

uhhhh no it wasn't

[GreyLycanTrope]

CosmicGnosis wrote...
Why can't Shepard just speak through the Reapers and explain what is happening? Maybe he could ask the galaxy what they think about the Reapers' presence?

And what if popular opinion says they don't like it the Reapers just leave? You created a new Catalyst out of Shepard and the old AI, experiance shows that giving up on their mission or programed task (galactic peace in this case) just isn't in either of their vocabularies.

Trying to rally against the new overlord will likely result in a bad time, as the program can easily just label you a threat and kill or detain you. Shepard very much is big brother in this scenario.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 11 décembre 2013 - 03:55 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

I thought Destroy was only a paragon option in the IT ending.

[dreamgazer]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Trying to rally against the new overlord will likely result in a bad time, as the program can easily just label you a threat and kill or detain you. Shepard very much is big brother in this scenario.

"Shepard", you mean. The man or woman they once were.

[GreyLycanTrope]

dreamgazer wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

Trying to rally against the new overlord will likely result in a bad time, as the program can easily just label you a threat and kill or detain you. Shepard very much is big brother in this scenario.

"Shepard", you mean. The man or woman they once were.

Quite.

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Laughable. All stories have themes, Deinon.

Of course all stories have themes. Should a player be able to mindlessly spam their way through the narrative, clicking the same spot on the wheel, barely conscious to what they're choosing to do and with no introspection on why they're doing it, though?

I say it's better to arrange dialogue options in a way that forces them to stop and consider their actions.

That really has nothing to do with you implying people who welcomes themes are stupid earlier.

For big choices? Fine. I wouldn't care.

For small dialogue? No. It's irriating and pointless. I don't want to hunt around on the dialogue wheel constantly just to be polite to a friend. Nor do I want to choose options that aren't ideally paraphrased and accidently be rude. I don't sit around for five minutes at every dialogue option wondering if I should choose to be polite or not.

So for 95% of dialogue? No. It's a very poor idea.

[dreamgazer]

We can't discuss Dragon Age around David, Deinon. Don't want to spoil the lad before he's played it.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Don't think he's played that yet.

[DeinonSlayer]

dreamgazer wrote...

We can't discuss Dragon Age around David, Deinon. Don't want to spoil the lad before he's played it.

I guess we'll just have to play into his fantasy that it doesn't exist.

Take this example, David. "Polite" in this particular encounter is the third option out of four available.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 11 décembre 2013 - 04:00 .

[ImaginaryMatter]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

We can't discuss Dragon Age around David, Deinon. Don't want to spoil the lad before he's played it.

I guess we'll just have to play into his fantasy that it doesn't exist.

I'm new around these here parts, what about David and Dragon Age?

[Cainhurst Crow]

I think bioware getting ride of the paragon and renegade indicators for the endings was one of the best design decisions of the game, since it made you decide, using your own judgement, which was more appropriate for your character to pick in line with the moral principles you believed in.

If only the choices hadn't been so bad, then maybe people would actually talk about that then say "the endings and everything about them sucked".

[MassivelyEffective0730]

I don't think he'll ever play it.

He probably knows it'll break his idea's on games completely.

Since you can be a jerk to all of your companions. You can tell them to leave. You can make them hate you. You can even kill all of them.

And no karma meter, just approval and disapproval.

The game might break his brain. Safer for him to snipe at it from a distance, even if his shots completely miss and backfire.

[Steelcan]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

We can't discuss Dragon Age around David, Deinon. Don't want to spoil the lad before he's played it.

I guess we'll just have to play into his fantasy that it doesn't exist.

I'm new around these here parts, what about David and Dragon Age?

he refuses to play it

[MassivelyEffective0730]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

DeinonSlayer wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

We can't discuss Dragon Age around David, Deinon. Don't want to spoil the lad before he's played it.

I guess we'll just have to play into his fantasy that it doesn't exist.

I'm new around these here parts, what about David and Dragon Age?

He loves to talk about how it should do things according to his preferences (he's never played it.)