311 réponses à ce sujet

[BabyPuncher]

And you're basically still trying to set up a scenario where you can only choose good. As with the Krogan, it's good to cure them, but it's also good to have the support of the Salarian because like you said, there is a huge threat, so the extinction of all species should outweight the extinction of one species. If it's underhanded and no one knows about it, then it could actually be the paragon decision in the big picture since it could potentially save the universe by gathering as much forces as possible. 

 

Not really.

 

The salarians are going to fighting regardless. It's not like they're going to power down their ships and melt down their weapons and let the Reapers kill them just to spite Shepard. Not alongside the other fleets, but fighting nonetheless.

 

The krogan - not so much. If they're not united, they pretty much go to waste.

[BabyPuncher]

I don't follow the argument here. The bigger the scale, the more likely "good" choices are to work out positively?

Your other post sounds like you want the dice loaded so this will turn out to be the case, but I don't see any reason why this should be the case in the game any more than it is ITRW.

 

I think you need to stop and think about how stories work. Because pretty much every story does exactly that.

 

Pretty much every story has events work out in ways that would be exceedingly 'unlikely' in the real world.

 

Pretty much every story is a 'loaded die' by definition. If it wasn't, it wouldn't be a story. It would just be a random collection of stuff happening for no reason, and that's stupid.

 

You do understand why and how a random collection of stuff happening does not make for fiction, yes?

[Battlebloodmage]

Not really.

 

The salarians are going to fighting regardless. It's not like they're going to power down their ships and melt down their weapons and let the Reapers kill them just to spite Shepard. Not alongside the other fleets, but fighting nonetheless.

 

The krogan - not so much. If they're not united, they pretty much go to waste.

The salarians could offer additional helps shown as war assets. They could just ignore Earth and strength their own homeworld as some of the other planets did.

The Krogan didn't know about the deal, so they're actually united under Wreav/Eve and very hopeful because their disease is "cured". 

[Majestic Jazz]

Majority of people choose the good decisions not only because it's good but also because it allows them the best benefits. Decision like killing squadmates or violence often result in having less characters or in ME3 case, hinder the ability from getting the best ending. I like decisions like Samara and Morinth whereas if you kill the squadmate, you get a different character. Decisions like killing wrex and/or Mordin allow you to have the support of both Salarian and Krogan. I want more of these decisions instead of paragon = best outcome, regenade = worse outcome.

I have not read the replies but I would like to add to your statement. Too many times in Bioware games is it easy it make the good choice and hard to make the bad choice. This is unrealistic as often in life it is easy to make the bad choices and hard to make the good ones.

In life sometimes I am "punished" for being good or making the right decisions and I often miss out on things. Whereas had I made the wrong choice, I would not have missed out and so on.

Bioware's logic in ME is that good choices = equal best outcome and bad choices = worst outcome and that is not realistic.

Sad to say this but dont expect ME4 to be any different. I think TW3 does a better job at this but ME4 will be the standard "The best way to play/enjoy the game is to be a goody2shoes and if you are renegade, then you will lose/miss out on content."

[bondari reloads.]

ME made no secret of it's axial morality system which, while superior to lawful/chaotic/true good/neutral/evil, didn't really allow for a successful psychopath who prioritizes his survival over everything else.

Oddly enough, the paragon choices were more rewarding in that regard, anyway.

Renegade Shepard has some of the best lines in the trilogy, but that had no impact in the grand scheme of things.

[Hazegurl]

Good points. Though since we discuss ME the idea is we have a HUGE threat, so big that everything else - all differences! - have to be forgotten.

 

True, but does that mean that all differences will be simply forgotten? You can work with someone for the time being and still hate their guts and think about ways to get them fired when you no longer need them. 

 

Now, there is no such thing as a "treacherous nation". If one president made a bad decision does it mean the country has to be excluded from reliable nations ever since? No matter who is making decisions?

 

But there is a such thing as treacherous people.  And if the person in charge of such a decision decides to betray you, I highly doubt the entire country would just side with you over their own leader.

 

Peace treaty - ambassador came to you openly, no violations of any law (common case in the game). And request is legal but anyone else is too busy to help or have other priorities - so, go ahead, it's your time.

 

Scenario: What if the ambassador is from a nation where slavery is legal (Batarians).  Where Batarian colonies raid human colonies for slaves.

 

Do you still support the Batarian ambassador? Do you just assume they will cease all slave trade? If they declare that they will, yet possibly trade secretly, will you risk ruining the alliance to have spies investigate?  Will you break off the deal if they are still trading in slaves?  Do you risk losing the favor  of the human colonies who had been raided by the Batarians just to have them as allies?

 

 

Add to it common (for the game, we are still talking about the game) necessity to build up reputation for you PC. And you get a typical ME quest where "help=paragon choice=good outcome".

So, what would be "non paragon" choice in that case?

 

 

According to your set up the renegade option is already set up to lose. A peaceful non law violating nation wants to be your ally.  You gain an ally willing to help because you have none and you gain good reputation.  It's a no brainer to pick the Paragon Help option.  The Renegade option in that case would be to refuse the alliance, lose an ally willing to help and get no rep. This is exactly what people are saying they don't want.  There should be a story here with positives and negatives to a choice.  Not Paragon selections being your "Win the game" button.

[Majestic Jazz]

If there is two things we can expect from ME4, it is:

1) Poor hair options/animations

2) Being penalized for not being a goody2shoes character through closed/eliminated content as a result of being a renegade.

[BabyPuncher]

According to your set up the renegade option is already set up to lose. A peaceful non law violating nation wants to be your ally.  You gain an ally willing to help because you have none and you gain good reputation.  It's a no brainer to pick the Paragon Help option.  The Renegade option in that case would be to refuse the alliance, lose an ally willing to help and get no rep. This is exactly what people are saying they don't want.  There should be a story here with positives and negatives to a choice.  Not Paragon selections being your "Win the game" button.

 

I would say that depends on what you mean by 'positives' and 'negatives.'

 

You shouldn't be resentful towards so-called 'Win the game' buttons. This is a game, after all, and we do play it by pressing buttons.
 

[Lady Luminous]

I actually prefer taking the renegade options because it makes for a darker drama. 

 

When I played paragon as opposed to renegade, I felt like the missions had less weight. It was like "Yay, I saved the day. Again."

[Hazegurl]

If there is two things we can expect from ME4, it is:

1) Poor hair options/animations

2) Being penalized for not being a goody2shoes character through closed/eliminated content as a result of being a renegade.

lol!! Sadly this is probably true.

 

I actually prefer taking the renegade options because it makes for a darker drama. 

 

When I played paragon as opposed to renegade, I felt like the missions had less weight. It was like "Yay, I saved the day. Again."

 

Nothing beats shooting Mordin in the back then watch him crawl toward the console while Wrex and Eve tell you they're gonna name their kids after you.

 

Then shooting down Wrex at the Citadel.

 

Although I agree with sabotaging the cure even with Wrex and Eve alive those scenes were hard to watch/do.

[Battlebloodmage]

I would say that depends on what you mean by 'positives' and 'negatives.'

 

You shouldn't be resentful towards so-called 'Win the game' buttons. This is a game, after all, and we do play it by pressing buttons.
 

I think the problem for me personally is that there is no weight for a decision based games. Games like Witcher actually has a good balance of these. Some good decisions may have negative connotation. I would prefer more weighted decisions like if you're free from a prison and a prisoner begs you to free him, you face with a dilemma of freeing a criminal, even if they said they were innocent, can you trust them? DAI actually has these decisions like with the wardens, but sure enough, there are no consequence behind them. 

[Aimi]

BioWare should not concern themselves with questions of good or evil.

I disagree with this. Moral questions are intrinsic to life, and BioWare games in general have a hallmark of addressing moral imperatives anyway. This does not mean that they should divide up everything into Derpagon and Herpagade or some similar mess of a quasi-ethical decision system; they didn't do that in any of the Dragon Age games and still managed to discuss ethical issues and dilemmas.

We should get the outcomes that make sense, under the circumstances.

I agree with this. I do not see any particular reason for there to be some sort of 'balance' between different moral approaches to in-game choices.

[Battlebloodmage]

lol!! Sadly this is probably true.

 

Nothing beats shooting Mordin in the back then watch him crawl toward the console while Wrex and Eve tell you they're gonna name their kids after you.

 

Then shooting down Wrex at the Citadel.

 

Although I agree with sabotaging the cure even with Wrex and Eve alive those scenes were hard to watch/do.

To add insult to injury, Shepard used the gun Mordin gave you as a sign of his trust to shoot him.

 

Personally, I would take the deal with the salarian as well if I didn't metagame. I wanted to get the best ending. The need of the many should outweight the want of the few. 

[BabyPuncher]

I think the problem for me personally is that there is no weight for a decision based games. Games like Witcher actually has a good balance of these. Some good decisions may have negative connotation. I would prefer more weighted decisions like if you're free from a prison and a prisoner begs you to free him, you face with a dilemma of freeing a criminal, even if they said they were innocent, can you trust them? DAI actually has these decisions like with the wardens, but sure enough, there are no consequence behind them. 

 

That sounds to me like a choice that's thematically pointless.

 

I don't think you understand the reason why choices are the way they are in games.

 

[Lady Luminous]

lol!! Sadly this is probably true.

 

Nothing beats shooting Mordin in the back then watch him crawl toward the console while Wrex and Eve tell you they're gonna name their kids after you.

 

Then shooting down Wrex at the Citadel.

 

Although I agree with sabotaging the cure even with Wrex and Eve alive those scenes were hard to watch/do.

 

Actually, that was one where I chose the paragon option, but I really liked the renegade options with Samara and her Ardat Yakshi daughters. 

 

I also enjoyed the drama of Tali jumping off the cliff (even though, yes I cried.)

[Battlebloodmage]

Actually, that was one where I chose the paragon option, but I really liked the renegade options with Samara and her Ardat Yakshi daughters. 

 

I also enjoyed the drama of Tali jumping off the cliff (even though, yes I cried.)

I feel like Morinth should have come back also for that scene, but have a slightly altered scene. Anything would be better than turning her into a banshee. They really needed for more renegade contents

 

Tali's jumping off the cliff was so heartbreaking. I would have preferred if they force us to choose instead of making a happy ending for everyone. 

[Ahriman]

I believe best outcome should be available through Paragade approach, so you'll have step on neck goodiness/ruthlessness in order to direct to things in right direction, because ME3 punished you for stepping out of pure route, even though I prefer to pure route.

 I also like shining knight/pragmatic/selfish idea, this could finally make people choose middle option. Pragmatic won't get much of popularity or power, but that's your thing if you want things done in a best way.

[Battlebloodmage]

I believe best outcome should be available through Paragade approach, so you'll have step on neck goodiness/ruthlessness in order to direct to things in right direction, because ME3 punished you for stepping out of pure route, even though I prefer to pure route.

 I also like shining knight/pragmatic/selfish idea, this could finally make people choose middle option. Pragmatic won't get much of popularity or power, but that's your thing if you want things done in a best way.

How does that work in a romance? 

[AlanC9]

I think you need to stop and think about how stories work. Because pretty much every story does exactly that.
 
Pretty much every story has events work out in ways that would be exceedingly 'unlikely' in the real world.
 
Pretty much every story is a 'loaded die' by definition. If it wasn't, it wouldn't be a story. It would just be a random collection of stuff happening for no reason, and that's stupid.
 
You do understand why and how a random collection of stuff happening does not make for fiction, yes?

Oh, I agree that it's all deliberately designed. I just don't see why doing the right thing should work any better in ME than it does in Game of Thrones.

[BabyPuncher]

Oh, I agree that it's all deliberately designed. I just don't see why doing the right thing should work any better in ME than it does in Game of Thrones.

 

...That's not obvious? Because ME and GoT are written by different people who wish to enunciate different truths, and don't agree what those truths actually are.
 

[AlanC9]

...That's not obvious? Because ME and GoT are written by different people who wish to enunciate different truths, and don't agree what those truths actually are.

Right. This is a problem with ME; it's "truths" are not only untrue, they make for dull decisions.

[Xen]

Actually, that was one where I chose the paragon option, but I really liked the renegade options with Samara and her Ardat Yakshi daughters. 

 

I also enjoyed the drama of Tali jumping off the cliff (even though, yes I cried.)

That's an example of a P/R choice that is almost done properly. The paragon idealist chooses the geth because s/he considers their plight to be morally superior and trusts the geth not to betray and ally with the Reapers yet again. The Renegade chooses the safer and more familiar option that keeps both their squadmate and potentially gives slightly more assets to the war.

Of course, it is completely invalidated when you consider the ability to get a ceasefire, which a full rengade would not be able to achieve no matter what they did having airlocked Legion in ME2. A full paragon meanwhile, could even let the Heretic geth live (objectively called a bad decision by Legion for the peace process) and still get the ceasefire and full quarian/geth support without much issue.

 

[BabyPuncher]

Right. This is a problem with ME; it's "truths" are not only untrue, they make for dull decisions.

 

Uh-huh. I'm interested in what you think those 'truths' actually are. And what you think what the 'truths' of a story such as GoT are,exactly?

[Valkyrja]

If we truly have "paragon\renegade" system (and heroic fantasy, even scifi fantasy is about good heroes), then we do in fact have truly objectively good decisions and it would be "out of character" for the game to reward "bad" choices.

The question is - are we a hero in MEA or just a surviver in the world?  

 

The "bad" choices shouldn't exist to begin with.

 

Press a button to be good or evil was alright in KoTOR because it is Star Wars and well the standards of videogame storytelling were different in 2003. But not everything is Star Wars and time has marched on as well. A blatantly evil path is often incoherent with the story and worse is well not very interesting anymore. We should expect a story-driven WRPG to do more with choice than say Infamous. BioWare said they were moving on from Dark Side but failed with Jade Empire and heavily stumbled with ME1 and ME2.

 

BioWare seems to have at least realized that something was wrong with their approach when they rewrote the Renegade tone for ME3 after how terrible it was in the earlier games.

[Ahriman]

How does that work in a romance? 

Since you are on BSN I assume you already know the answer. If not, you not - ask Mordin.