70 réponses à ce sujet

[Malanek]

You can also convince the Illusive man to shoot himself if you have selected other choices throughout the game.

[KaiserShep]

I always thought that was a bit too much of a rehash of Saren, so I always go the intimidate route. I love shooting him just as he's about to finish the sentence "I am the pinnacle of…"

[PhroXenGold]

In terms of the impact of Paragon/Renegade, whatever BW does, I hope its not the awful ME2 system which promoted unrealistic, extremist characters by rewarding maxing out one side or the other. People aren't one dimensional, they take different positions in different circumstances. And yet ME2 kicked you in the balls if you tried to play a more complex, nuanced, realistic character by locking out dialogue options. (Oh, and the scars were stupid. Really stupid).

 

I would personally, if the system is kept in game, move it somewhat more towards how you are percieved instead of how you actually are. But then I hold this attitude towards all alignement systems in RPGs.

 

I also agree with the previous posts which suggest that all dialogue options should be available to everyone, even if they won't always work. Even if you're so Paragon people think of you as the second coming of Gandhi, you should still be able to threaten people. They might not take you seriously, but you should be able to do it.

 

In terms of what Paragon and Renegade should actually mean, if they're staying in the game, take them back to how they were ME1. I partially agree with Sylvius earlier post here that they were about the law/chaos divide, but not entirely - while I think that is a factor, and in some decisions that is the differentiation, when it some to the "big" decisions, I personally intepret the many of the Renegade choices as less about defying authority, and more about "serving the greater good", taking actions that lean more towards "evil" (e.g. sacrificing lives), becuase the outcome of those actions will result in a greater number of lives being saved.

 

I personally consider the vast majority of choices in ME (both Paragon and Renegade) to be morally justifiable. That's not to say I think they're right, but that you can put forward a reasonable, coherent argument for them to be morally correct. In ME2&3, I find this to be less common. It's not absent by any means, there are still some great decisions along these lines, but Renegade in particular drifts away from this to be, not outright "evil",  but certainly less about "doing what must be done". Paragon's drift is, to me, from "doing what is percieved as right" to "doing what is right". Basically, I think a lot of the depth and nuance from ME1s system is lost along the line.

 

The other thing I'll put forward is that not every decision should be between Paragon and Renegade. The big problem with creating a system with two alignments like this is that its very easy to shoehorn every decision into a choice between the two, even when it makes no sense, and past ME games fell into this trap. The most egregious example was Legion's loyalty mission in ME2. Given how Paragon is presented elsewhere in the series, neither of the options available to you are in any way consistent with the actions of a "Paragon". They are both Renegade. And they should have been presented as such. Whatever you do, you get "red points". Thats not to say I object to the decision itself - on the contrary, I think it was one of the best moral choices presented to us in the series. To this day, I still can't decide what I consider the "right" thing to do is - but labelling one of the choices as "Paragon", depsite it being utterly inconsistent with how the game has presented that alignment, purely to keep the rigid P/R system, was a big mistake. There should be times where you have no choice but to take an action that aligns with the "renegade" philosophy, and the game should treat it as such (and likewise, there should be times where the only outcomes are essentially Paragon).

[Han Shot First]

If they choose to go Paragon/Renegade again, which I feel they shouldn't, since it's outdated, same with SWTOR Dark Side/Light Side, yawn boring.

 

I wouldn't mind seeing Mass Effect dropping the paragon/renegade morality system, and just going the route The Witcher 3 did. I have to disagree with you on SWTOR though.

 

How can you have a Star Wars game without some form of force alignment? That is central to the series, and it isn't Star Wars without it. Force users in particularly should be ruled by force alignment.

[Khrystyn]

You can also convince the Illusive man to shoot himself if you have selected other choices throughout the game.

 

Thanks Malanek for your comment here.

 

I think I read somewhere on masseffect.wikia that Shepard can shoot the Illusive Man IF Shep selected the six paragon dialog choices at all prior conversations with him. And this is my problem with the decision trees. I want to have a mix of P and R dialog choices with the I.M. and still be able to shoot that guy. Why should I be forced to agreeing with that twerp 6 times just so I can make him toast, or have him kill himself? This is an example situation where I'd like to have the option to shoot the I.M. without any regard to my previous conversations with him - or any other decision with any other character. Make all dialog/decision options available at all critical dialog decision points.

[Mister Gusty]

I do not care whether there is a morality system or not, though I would rather they get rid of it, all I want is to be able to do as I please choice-wise without having to fully commit to a paragon or renegade play style just so I can actually use persuade or intimidate options. If they implement choices like that in ME:A , then I don't really care if there is a little meter saying that I am a good guy or bad guy.

[Rimril]

I think they should adopt a system more akin to what Telltale has been doing with their games. As many have said already, the P/R system is outdated, and it's very limiting. Not to mention that being a Renegade locked out a significant amount of content, and a true Renegade would have no romance, which doesn't necessarily make sense.

The choices we make in MEA need to be based on how they will affect third parties. Essentially a faction system, but we don't need to keep a numbered "score" of what our reputation with different characters/races/colonies. Telltale's GoT is basically a string of brutal choices, and while MEA doesn't need to go quite that far, it could definitely take some pointers on how weighty choices make for a much more interesting narrative. I am a fan of the interrupts in the trilogy though, I would like to see those make a return.

[saladinbob]

That's the entire point of stories.

 

For the narrator to enunciate a truth for the audience. To 'tell' them something that's true. Something's that's right.

 

The game does not magically grow an arm, put a gun to your head and force you to agree. You're entirely free to think that what the narrator says about good and evil is completely stupid. You always are.

 

No it's not, the best stories do not draw conclusions for you, they allow you to draw your own conclusions. Besides, the narrator isn't enunciating any truth in Bioware games because you're being presented with a black and white decision to make, not being told what is the order of things. Choice is already in Bioware games, the problem is in how that choice is presented. Bioware is telling you if you choose X, you're a White Knight, choose Y and you're an Anti-Hero. That kind of writing works well in bed time stories for children, not in adult literature. You're deciding between two pre-determined answers, other games make you determine the answers before you choose, they force you to decide what you think is right, not whether you want to be a diplomat or a douche. That's the difference. Bioware's writing has all the moral complexity of a fairy tale.

[Annos Basin]

Paragon/renegade system doesn't sound interesting on paper, but practically I ended up enjoying it in ME 1-3. Not sure in which game I found it best, and it's not like I wouldn't had possibly liked some other system better, but it was very easy to suspend disbelief and just play along with it. Because it ended up feeling so much like a Shepard's quirk, how he/she thinks and experiences the world. While I will be avoiding MEA spoilers for most part, I'd be curious to hear in advance if paragon/renegade was a Shepard thing, or a Mass Effect thing that will continue in Andromeda. Either way I'll likely adapt.

 

Repuation system sounds good, but in any case I hope there'll be some flexibility to let the character grow (into some direction). When I played ME series for the second time with the same character, and decided to save Mordin this time, it ended up looking like my (mostly)paragon was actually scheming and manipulating personality. With best intentions, but not in a way which would make everyone smile and accept. (I let Ashley shoot Wrex, and take the blame. For starters. It was maybe unintentional from my Shepard, I'm not even sure...) He also went for different ending (and some choices before that) than you'd expect, because what he had seen and heard had changed his views. I loved this whole experience! So for my playing style it would be ideal if our characters won't get locked into certain personality or a route... But if there are hard decisions and lots of interaction with npcs, it's interesting to see consequences, and some reputation can easily be part of that.

[Sylvius the Mad]

I wouldn't mind having something like DA:O's cunning, which unlocks special dialogue. One of the finer moments when this is used is dealing with fake Waylon in Genitivi's house. You start catching him in his lie until he attacks. It was pretty amusing.

Even better is the way PoE does it, where all of the abilities can do that, not to mention a variety of pther variables as well.

[Torgette]

I wouldn't mind seeing Mass Effect dropping the paragon/renegade morality system, and just going the route The Witcher 3 did.

 

Pretty much

[Medhia_Nox]

@saladinbob:  I'm not sure I agree with you.  

 

I believe the best stories relay a message.  Lord of the Rings was clearly "the common man" and "nature" over "the complexities of modernization".   As Bilbo claims:  "It is no bad thing to celebrate a simple life."

 

Classical literature... from Frankenstein to To Kill a Mockingbird all posit very clear messages to the reader.  Whether you accept them or not is the choice you are given. 

 

I believe Bioware's failure in storytelling is the very fact that they do not put any such messages in their stories to be accepted or rejected... or, that the messages they DO put in are so "middle of the road" that they have no real effect.

 

The object of art is not to entertain (that is the object of entertainment) - IF games are ever to be an art, they must eschew the need to entertain, and express boldly the need to reveal a message or truth from the creator's perspective. 

[PhroXenGold]

@saladinbob:  I'm not sure I agree with you.  

 

I believe the best stories relay a message.  Lord of the Rings was clearly "the common man" and "nature" over "the complexities of modernization".   There is, as Bilbo claims:  "It is no bad thing to celebrate a simple life."

 

Classical literature... from Frankenstein to To Kill a Mockingbird all posit very clear messages to the reader.  Whether you accept them or not is the choice you are given. 

 

I believe Bioware's failure in storytelling is the very fact that they do not put any such messages in their stories to be accepted or rejected... or, that the messages they DO put in are so "middle of the road" that they have no real effect.

 

The object of art is not to entertain (that is the object of entertainment) - IF games are ever to be an art, they must eschew the need to entertain, and express boldly the need to reveal a message or truth from the creator's perspective. 

 

While this may be true, personally, I'd take entertainment over art any day....

[Torgette]

@saladinbob:  I'm not sure I agree with you.  

 

I believe the best stories relay a message.  Lord of the Rings was clearly "the common man" and "nature" over "the complexities of modernization".   There is, as Bilbo claims:  "It is no bad thing to celebrate a simple life."

 

Classical literature... from Frankenstein to To Kill a Mockingbird all posit very clear messages to the reader.  Whether you accept them or not is the choice you are given. 

 

I believe Bioware's failure in storytelling is the very fact that they do not put any such messages in their stories to be accepted or rejected... or, that the messages they DO put in are so "middle of the road" that they have no real effect.

 

The object of art is not to entertain (that is the object of entertainment) - IF games are ever to be an art, they must eschew the need to entertain, and express boldly the need to reveal a message or truth from the creator's perspective. 

 

I thought the Mass Effect trilogy's themes of existentialism and fate were apt, even if the plot was largely "save the world" stuff.

[shodiswe]

To a Certain degree I Think it makes sense that the people you talk to would know a few things about your reputation if you're fairly famous.

They also wouldn't be likely to take Renegade extremist threats seriously from a character with a Saints reputation. But I think ME1 overdid it.

Also, I Think people should be allowed to react differently to different situations because not every situation deserves a paragon response. Gerrel for example got punted and punched and thrown of the ship by my Paragon. And it feelt good.

I want it to be possible to make the decisions that feels right. Just because you're typicaly a niceguy/gal doesn't mean you should have to take anything from everyone out there.

A Full Renegade might just have to look at the target of your malice and sneer at them to get the Point across.... While the Paragon might find out that they might have to show more brutality and perhapd fire a few shots or get physical to get their Point across when they want to go down a path they arn't known for. That would make sense.

At some Point they will take you seriously.

[EmissaryofLies]

As long as npcs react realistically to what I do or say, we good.

 

Acting friendly when you have a reputation for being untrustworthy or ruthless should net suspicion from npcs, for example.

[phantomrachie]

Not really, it's a personal choice. You might think it's the Paragon thing to do to help, someone else might think it's the Paragon thing to do to not help. It's a blurring of ethics. Do no harm. Do no harm by not doing anything or do no harm by attempting to help? Paragon and Renegade decisions are the writers telling you what is good and what is bad, not your own conscience.

 

but that only matters if you are meta gaming & have decided already to be the super good guy. If you are rping then you are making a personal choice to do something & the game gives you points for it. 

 

There a Renegade options that could be argued to be the good option, if you didn't see those red points float up when you made them.

 

Killing the Rachni Queen for example - you are saving the galaxy from a species that you know are extremely hostile & killed alot of people. There is no reason to take the Queen at her word that her people where tricked.

 

If you got Paragon points instead of Renegade points for killing her people would see it as the good option. 

[Medhia_Nox]

@PhrenXGold:  I have nothing against entertainment, far from it. 

 

I do believe however that RPGs in general are a genre of games that rely very heavily on storytelling.  Whether it is appreciated or not, storytelling is very much an art form and certain methods should be considered when reaching for the most impactful form of storytelling.

 

Of course, the storyteller around the campfire is different from the storyteller at the tabletop game... and likewise, on the screen.  So, maybe new rules should be designed and developed (and I do believe Bioware is at the forefront of trying to hash out what makes a good computer story) - I simply believe that a great story has a clear "opinion" regardless of the medium.

 

@Torgette:  I actually was hoping they were going to nail home the angle that the Reapers were actually good for life as a whole - and bad for sapient life.  Sapient life is a threat to all other life forms (at least, the sapient life we currently know about - humans).  Had the Reapers been presented as champions of "Life" even at the expense of everything humans hold dear (which, in a very real sense, is meaningless to the universe) I would have believed that to be a polarizing, thought provoking, "truth" by the creators.  And I feel they were REALLY close to telling that story actually.

 

What we received, I believe, was not entirely strong at all.  Bioware makes power fantasy fiction... which, I strongly believe gets in the way of any real storytelling.  You must be willing to upset, alienate, even anger your audience for a truly good story (not so much for an entertaining one).  

 

====

 

I look at ME and DA as entertainment... not good storytelling (which I have already established I see as art).  So for me, these issues are really non-issues.  

 

BUT, I do believe my assessment is correct "if" Bioware ever wants to make it good entertainment that is ALSO exemplary storytelling. 

 

As of now, I find their stories totally effective on the entertainment level and need no real alteration. 

[Heimdall]

I'd just like them to jettison the P/R system entirely.

 

Morality systems can work, but Mass Effect's implementation has always been rather inconsistent and it doesn't have the Star Wars justification that its actually a thing in-universe.  Better to go the Dragon Age route and avoid color coding decisions.

[The Night Haunter]

Get rid of the entire 'morality meter' mechanic. It is a left over from the DnD roots of ME1. It has no useful place in modern games, especially ones that try and be all 'gray area', like ME2/3.

 

I prefer DAI's method of just having several choices (usually with an additional option that can be unlocked by doing additional work) without attaching any kind of preset morality to it.