119 réponses à ce sujet

[Daemul]

Mass Effect 3 renegade was fine, it was what it should have been from the beginning, not the moronic, one liner machine, badass wannabe, inept renegade of the first two games.

[RVallant]

I didn't see it as 'good' vs 'evil', merely pragmatism/irrationality/anger v keeping a level head/rationalism etc.

 

Both Paragon and Renegade have their moments, good and bad. I lean towards Paragon but use plenty of Renegade choices, for example;

 

Taking a shot with the sniper rifle with Archangel in ME2 isn't 'evil', neither is flipping your tables and punching that idiot Quarian for deciding to nuke the ship you were on. They seem like reasonable actions/responses to take. A lot of the renegade interrupts are worth using in my view, and exemplify the virtues in Sun Tzu's (and subsequently Mao Zedong), specifically, "We are not the Duke of Song".

Spoiler

For those who don't know, the Duke of Song took his army to defend his lands, where upon he saw his enemy crossing his army over a river, he refused advice to attack, until his enemy was across the river and had organised themselves and were ready for battle. This 'virtue' of his actions led to his defeat, thus "I/we are not the Duke of Song" = "We are not foolish enough to give our enemies an advantage or fair fight".

 

That said, all-renegade, especially in ME1 is a bit childish, some ridiculous comments and logic being used at times. However, the same applies for Paragon, going all-paragon is almost too idealistic. I'd keep the status quo but make it so that different situations require thought as to which option to use in order to gain the full benefit. 

[Rosstoration]

I find it very difficult to think of a game that actually implemented "morality" well. Mass Effect again falls into the trap of Paragon = The shining embodiment of a moron, and Renegade = A complete an utter moron. Again, there is absolutley no impetus whatsoever to play the game more grey, or to choose both Paragon and Renegade, because the rewards are weighted to playing one extreme or the other.

 

A poor system, Paragon and Renegade does not mean good and evil, Shepard is not evil, no matter what way you wish to play the game. This isn't Baldur's Gate where you could legitimately and justifiably play your character as purely evil. Paragon and Renegade simply represent two different methodologies. Diplomatic and Action-oriented, the Renegade options offered in the latter Mass Effect games are just evil or nonsensical from any tactical perspective, same with some paragon options.

 

The whole system needs to be scrapped or completely re-done from top to bottom if it is actually going to work.

[Rasande]

How is that amoral? He needed to die. It's no different than shooting Joseph Mengele (unfortunately, he was never shot). Most people cheer on the deaths of mad scientists and torturers .

 

It's even funnier if you're been Paragon with Aria the whole time. "Ha! Look who's the hardass now."

 

Don't think we're talking about the same General. I was talking about the Turian that the Blue Suns want you to off beacuse he's causing them problems.

[Kynare]

I think they had issues defining what "Renegade" meant throughout the series. Was it being an a-hole? Being ruthless? Or just someone who works against the law/bends the rules/cuts corners?

 

The Paragon/Renegade system worked better in ME1 when Shepard was with the Alliance and had a set way they should be acting and representing as an Alliance soldier. Once they were with Cerberus, there weren't any rules or doctrines they had to follow, so Renegade had more mischievous actions they did without much reason.

 

Paragon Shepard could be seen as still being loyal to the Alliance and acting under their ideals, which (in a vanilla playthrough) generally never conflicted severely with his/her own. Whereas even if Renegade Shepard openly supports Cerberus, the story still tries to force conflict between them. Like when TIM tricks Shepard into entering the Collector ship. They give you a "true renegade" option to support Cerberus by the end of ME2... but then you end up with the Alliance anyway come ME3. You never get to really embrace the Renegade path.

 

I just got the impression that Paragon was more favored by the story compared to Renegade. Maybe that's just me. I went full Paragon in one playthrough and rarely felt like her actions were out-of-character... overly-idealistic at times, yes (straight up hypocritical during Mordin's LM, which is one of the only complaints I have), but still consistent with how they depicted him/her in ME1, and consistent with the story.

 

Anyway, tl;dr A new system would probably be better.

[themikefest]

In my opinion, I like the Mass Effect 1 version of renegade Shepard... (S)he was a jerk, a bit of a bully, I guess the "anti-hero."  But renegade Shepard in Mass Effect 3?  Was just plain ruthless, I didn't even bother playing a full renegade campaign in ME3.  

 

What do you all think? Less evil, more evil, or keep it the same?

A lot more evil would be fine for me

 

ME1 wasn't bad. I would add a couple more interrupts or at least some more harsh dialogue

 

ME2 has some good interrupts. I would've added a couple more and changed a couple paragon interrupts and made them renegade interrupts

 

ME3. What a joke. I would add a lot more interrupts including a few directed to the squadmates or at least have the choice for some very mean dialogue or even some physical interaction causing harm.  There were a couple paragon interrupts that would've worked better as a renegade interrupt

 

If the next game or if its going to be a trilogy, then I like to do this again. An excellent playthrough

[CronoDragoon]

You can keep the Paragon/Renegade system so long as you alter its place in the dialogue system.

The P/R options make sense from a role-playing perspective: if you continue to select consistent dialogue options that form a heavily concentrated persona, then it unlocks additional options. The rework would need to include:

1. Defining what Paragon/Renegade is. Even if it just means idealist/consequentialist. Sometimes what "playing a Paragon" or "Renegade" is is vague. You can see this in how people interpret each of the ME3 endings to be either P or R.

2. Change it from a victory option to simply a role-playing option. Sometimes picking the P/R option will lead to a better outcome than the grey options, sometimes worse. It will depend on the situation. Appealing to a mercenary's idealistic side might end in disaster, for example.

[Dr. Rush]

On another note, I would argue, after you get rid of paragon/renegade entirely, change the narrative so you aren't forcing us into being a hero. Bioware used to make games where players could choose to be genuinely evil, not just rude dicks. In KOTOR, you could end the game as a villain. In Jade Empire, you could end the game as a villain. 

 

Bioware has since abandoned that idea, and have written narratives and stories that force the protagonist into being a hero. Shepard could never become a villain, no matter what choices he/she made. Give us back the option to roleplay as a truly evil villain instead of just a rude and impatient anti-hero. 

[Nitrocuban]

ME1-3 Renegade Shepard wasn't actually evil, he was just an a$$hole with kinda good intentions.

[MrFob]

On another note, I would argue, after you get rid of paragon/renegade entirely, change the narrative so you aren't forcing us into being a hero. Bioware used to make games where players could choose to be genuinely evil, not just rude dicks. In KOTOR, you could end the game as a villain. In Jade Empire, you could end the game as a villain. 
 
Bioware has since abandoned that idea, and have written narratives and stories that force the protagonist into being a hero. Shepard could never become a villain, no matter what choices he/she made. Give us back the option to roleplay as a truly evil villain instead of just a rude and impatient anti-hero.

To be fair, when they first introduced the paragon/renegade system, they specifically designed it to go away from the KOTOR route, where you could be evil. I think that was a very good idea. While pure evil fits very well into the Star Wars universe with it's Jedi and Sith, it has less viability in other universes, such as ME, which are much more based on the real world.

In the real world, you will have a hard time finding completely evil people. Even those who act in an evil manner from your perspective will have their own motivations and justifications, which make their action either "good" or at least necessary in their mind. I like this approach for story telling as well and I hope ME sticks to it.

 

That said, it would be nice to have a protagonist in ME who can become an anti hero, depending on the players actions. For example, someone who is hunted by those, that were established as "the good guys" before (e.g. the Council and the Alliance). Now the player may choose, does he want to try and clear his name and reconcile with these powers or does he use this situation as an excuse to wreck some havoc around the galaxy.

 

So yes, i am all for extreme choices on both ends of the spectrum but they need to arise from a believable motivation, that goes beyond the player saying "I want to play an evil character".

[Revan Reborn]

Paragon/Renegade is silly and antiquated. It needs to be scrapped. The only reason it even reared its ugly head in Mass Effect is because the same team also made Star Wars: Knights of the Old Republic, which is where they got the idea from. It makes sense in Star Wars. It just limits storytelling in Mass Effect. It needs to go. If I had to guess, the next Mass Effect will have something similar to DAI where there are multiple choices of grey and you will have to choose which one you prefer most. More or less, it looks like BioWare is following CDPR's more realistic and less black/white approach.

[BabyPuncher]

I don't want the persuasion options to be abandoned but I want them to be revamped. We should't have a big "I win button" in the dialogue wheel.

 

Some characters should react differently to persuasion. Some shouldn't even be persuaded anyway. Other could only be intimidated etc...

 

Every single possible successful action in nearly every video game is ultimately an 'I win button.' That's what video games are. Us, the players, pushing plastic buttons. You're not going to get away from the plain and simple fact that nearly all video games are won because the players presses buttons to do very easy tasks.

 

The player is able to shoot 20 enemies in the face on a mission because they press an "I win button." They aim, pull the plastic trigger, and win. It's a trivially easy task for pretty much anyone who spends significant time with such games. Congratulations, you just pulled off yet another superhuman feat from the comfort of your couch, for the 30th time today. 

 

You could introduce a minigame of some sort. You could have a persuasion stat. But ultimately, it's still going to be a mainstream video game designed to appeal to a wide audience, and it's still going to trivially easy for the overwhelmingly majority of players. A 'win' button.

 

The sooner you accept that reality, the better.

[DrBlingzle]

The persuasion options should just be cut or have their implementation be heavily revised to require more work from the player. Letting people bypass potentially interesting dilemmas with an instant win button isn't desirable.

 

Not that there should never be an option to get around a problem, it should just require something more involved than grinding reputation points.

^^^

Bioware I hope your doing what you promised and making notes of what the fans are saying.

[DrBlingzle]

And by the way, if anyone wants to vote whether or not to keep the paragon/renegade system...

http://forum.bioware...-system-in-me4/

[capn233]

Maybe cookies would change your mind.                       The Alliance needs your help.

                                                                \                        /

                                                                           o            - We'll try something else.

                                                                /                        \

[Claymore to the face]                                                       I hope you die in a fire.

[goishen]

Very first time through I killed Udina, let Tali die (I'm a monster, I know), and did several other things that weren't exactly paragon.  Usually, I'm an extremely paragon player.   But the first time through?  Nope.  

 

So, I think that the "instant win options" aren't always instant win.  They're emotionally designed to have an effect on the player.  And they did that, perfectly.

[laudable11]

I just want more of "you're working too hard" moments.

Amen. I was playing full paragon but when I realised I was rescuing my bff...old boy had to die.

[TheJiveDJ]

What? No, no, no... I need more evils plz... plus, Ren Shep was pretty tame in ME3...

[SolNebula]

Sure OP but they should also make Paragon less cheesy. The real division should be pragmatic (renegade) vs lawful (paragon). This division should not be about your objective but on how to get to that goal.

[BabyPuncher]

Sure OP but they should also make Paragon less cheesy. The real division should be pragmatic (renegade) vs lawful (paragon). This division should not be about your objective but on how to get to that goal.

 

No, it really shouldn't.

[Aimi]

Sure OP but they should also make Paragon less cheesy. The real division should be pragmatic (renegade) vs lawful (paragon). This division should not be about your objective but on how to get to that goal.

yeah because pragmatic and lawful are definitely two different kinds of things with no meaningful overlap whatsoever