376 réponses à ce sujet

[Drone223]

I don't think "evil" is the right word, It should be assertive or aggressive. I've never found the renegade options to be "evil". It may toe the line at times, but it was for the greater good.

The portrayal of renegades in the trilogy has been rather inconsistent, it's one of the many problems of the morality system in the ME series. Bioware would be better off dropping the morality system for the ME series altogether since it clear doesn't work.

[Sturm.B]

Shooting-Mordin-Solus-in-the-back evil 

[NWN-Ming-Ming]

It's kind of the same problem that Jade Empire had with what promised to be an awesome morality-scale.

 

The Way of the Open Palm and The Way of the Closed Fist were both brilliantly adapted concepts, but the axis didn't allow for simultaneous development the way DA2 had the Friendship and Rivalry scale, which would have been much better.  If you really wanted to support one linear scale you could, or you could let the sum of your choices happen and see where it took you, maybe not into territory that was 'past the point of no return'.

 

But in execution, the writers created situational conflicts that were more along the lines of traditional 'good' and 'evil' and sometimes even just 'nice-guy' and '@55hole'. 

 

Heck even Neverwinter Nights 1 and 2 occasionally had moments of brilliance just with the traditional alignment scale, in forcing the heroes to sometimes examine if they were actually 'helping' people by solving their problems for them rather than forcing them to learn to help themselves.  I really loved the complication of ethical philosophy that could be brought about by the 4-way axis as opposed to the polar axis recent games have emphasized.

 

Anyhow...  my preference would be for a game that allowed you to more deeply explore the concepts of choices and consequences on a scale that was more than +/- sums.  But the problem is creating enough in-depth side quests to coexist along with a main quest that could seriously derail if it truly allowed you to take the path less traveled,

[Dark Helmet]

You know, I don't really think you have much of a clue what the words 'objective' and 'subjective' actually mean. They do have meaning, you see. They aren't just pretty decorations to insert in a sentence to sprinkle in intelligence like salt on a slab of meat.

 

First you go and claim that they 'objectively' meant nothing. And then you tell me we can't really think about it since it's 'subjective' values. And now you're saying they're unknowable and incomphensible so we still aren't to think about it. Objective, subjective, unknowable in a span of minutes. Don't you think this is all rather amateurish?

 

David have you ever once argued with someone in good faith?

 

Do you know how?

 

I'm legitimately curious. Because you've been doing the exact same schtick for a while now..

[pdusen]

Just play Kotor if you want that.

 

I did. It was awesome.

[God]

Tali probably remembered what happened to Mordin when he tried to defy Shepard's will.

(I'm just kidding. I agree that it's stupid that Tali doesn't try to stop the upload in that scene.)

 

Indeed, and my Shepard probably would have rounded with a carnifex and blew a hole in her face plate.

 

I still think the games should have been a lot (I mean a lot) darker than they were.

[God]

Only if you consider the 'War Asset' number the sole quantifier of value in the ME universe.

 

I consider the concept behind them (the tangible, physical value an asset brings to the war effort) to be the sole quantifier of value in the ME universe.

 

It's why I won't put my forces at a significant risk for civilians who contribute nothing to the war effort. I'm not going to risk a single ship for a single refugee ship (unless they have something that furthers my own goals).

[God]

You know, I don't really think you have much of a clue what the words 'objective' and 'subjective' actually mean. They do have meaning, you see. They aren't just pretty decorations to insert in a sentence to sprinkle in intelligence like salt on a slab of meat.

 

First you go and claim that they 'objectively' meant nothing. And then you tell me we can't really think about it since it's 'subjective' values. And now you're saying they're unknowable and incomphensible so we still aren't to think about it. Objective, subjective, unknowable in a span of minutes. Don't you think this is all rather amateurish?

 

About as much as your pitiful attempts at psycho-analysis, maybe. 

 

Practice what you preach, bub. You get mad when people talk in circles around you, calling their words 'silly debate terms they looked up on wikipedia'.

[Quarian Master Race]

Tali probably remembered what happened to Mordin when he tried to defy Shepard's will.

(I'm just kidding. I agree that it's stupid that Tali doesn't try to stop the upload in that scene.)

The amount of Shepards who both killed Mordin and genocided the quarians is likely extremely small. Remember that the vast majority of people who play this game are such paragon drones that they cured the genophage with goddamn Wreav in charge (only 8% of players sabotaged and only 3.8% actually shot Mordin, yet 64% didn't have Wrex in ME3). Most people are idiots who think with their feels. If there had been a renegade interrupt required to stop Tali/Raan from frying the toaster (which, curiously they seem to have no problem doing when you side with them) the amount of playthroughs the geth survived would have probably been in the single digits.

Besides, Tali never displays a fear of death at any prior point in the series especially when it comes to her species (indeed she's shown a willingness to An Hero herself for them on multiple occasions that were of a much less serious nature), so that would be out of character. It is especially ridiculous for Raan, who simply puts a gun to her own head instead of the robot or human that she really has no personal connection to.  It's poorly written scenes like that which are the reason "muh choices" shouldn't take precedence over narrative sense.

[AlanC9]

Remember that the vast majority of people who play this game are such paragon drones that they cured the genophage with goddamn Wreav in charge (only 8% of players sabotaged and only 3.8% actually shot Mordin, yet 64% didn't have Wrex in ME3). Most people are idiots who think with their feels. If there had been a renegade interrupt required to stop Tali/Raan from frying the toaster (which, curiously they seem to have no problem doing when you side with them) the amount of playthroughs the geth survived would have probably been in the single digits.

Well, yeah, but a Renegade interrupt isn't consistent with how Bio's scoring the choice in the first place. What if it was a Paragon interrupt? (Though that would have been a fairly odd example of a Paragon interrupt.)

[Seboist]

Shooting-Mordin-Solus-in-the-back evil 

That wasn't evil, allowing him to continue would've been.

 

 

The amount of Shepards who both killed Mordin and genocided the quarians is likely extremely small. Remember that the vast majority of people who play this game are such paragon drones that they cured the genophage with goddamn Wreav in charge (only 8% of players sabotaged and only 3.8% actually shot Mordin, yet 64% didn't have Wrex in ME3). Most people are idiots who think with their feels. If there had been a renegade interrupt required to stop Tali/Raan from frying the toaster (which, curiously they seem to have no problem doing when you side with them) the amount of playthroughs the geth survived would have probably been in the single digits.

Besides, Tali never displays a fear of death at any prior point in the series especially when it comes to her species (indeed she's shown a willingness to An Hero herself for them on multiple occasions that were of a much less serious nature), so that would be out of character. It is especially ridiculous for Raan, who simply puts a gun to her own head instead of the robot or human that she really has no personal connection to.  It's poorly written scenes like that which are the reason "muh choices" shouldn't take precedence over narrative sense.

 

 

Vast majority of the paragon kiddies don't put all that much thought into things. These are the same people whom decry Cerberus and the Renegade "path" as "evil", but have no qualms with their Shepards being part of a ruthless totalitarian organization like the Spectres that has little oversight and is legally able to commit extrajudicial killings and other such dubious acts, or decry the similar Justicars that Samara belongs to.

[PlatonicWaffles]

As evil as they need to be within the context, although if I'm being honest, sometimes in 3 I felt the Renegade options could go a little too far. If we get more B.A. Action Hero Shepard-style Renegade ala ME2 stuff with a healthy dollop of "the ends justify the means" without going too far, then I'm all for it.

[Halfdan The Menace]

Renegade option need to be more sadistic in order to strike fear into our enemies.

[wright1978]

Vastly preferred renegade as practical rather than the douchebag evil ones.

[The Hierophant]

Something simple, and not too outlandish, like this... 

 

 

Not washing your hands after using the bathroom is pretty f****d up.

[Broganisity]

I'm on the fence about kill-able characters until I know whether or not this game is a standalone tale of our PC or a series. It's far too easy for characters to end up being tossed by the wayside because they became multi-state, like the ME2 lot, though Wrex is one of those few exceptions where he gets lots of content and is a big part of a subplot despite being able to gun his ass down in the first game and has a substitute who is significantly different.

Which is why I think that exception should be turned into a rule: a different outcome or variant occurs due to someone being dead rather than being alive. Wrex is the big example in the ME universe, but so would Thane (and in a way Kerahe), Tali, and Legion, and to a very small extent Zaeed. Other characters are sort of just pushed aside and forgotten (Most ME2 characters) or just forgotten entirely with no replacement (Garrus if dead). We talk about choice having consequence. . .and then we just sorta ignore the consequence part.

In comparison, Dragon Age likes to either forget a dead character existed or revive them and make them a major part of the series. . .not much in the way of a middle ground.

[The Heretic of Time]

Vast majority of the paragon kiddies don't put all that much thought into things. These are the same people whom decry Cerberus and the Renegade "path" as "evil", but have no qualms with their Shepards being part of a ruthless totalitarian organization like the Spectres that has little oversight and is legally able to commit extrajudicial killings and other such dubious acts, or decry the similar Justicars that Samara belongs to.

 

Justicars and Spectres are not alike though.

Being a Spectre means you're expected to get the job done without laws, codes or other constraints holding you back. They are the lawless deputies of the Council. 

A Justicar is almost the opposite. They have a very strict Code that they ought to follow to a T. They cannot break this Code or make decisions outside of it. They rather commit suicide than breaking the strict Code that they follow.

 

Paragon plebs think Samara is rather renegade, but in truth Samara is the ultimate paragon. Spectres tend to be more renegade, they ought to be, because they are supposed to uphold galactic stability by any means necessary. 

Paragon Shepard is a horrible Spectre and doesn't have what it takes to be a true Spectre. Renegade Shepard is the only true and proper Spectre worthy of the title.

[Arcian]

So the question is, how evil should the renegade options be in Mass Effect Andromeda?

Not at all?

 

And neither should Paragon be a measure of goodness. Paragons are about Means Justifies End, while Renegades are about End Justifies Means.

[Hazegurl]

Justicars and Spectres are not alike though.

Being a Spectre means you're expected to get the job done without laws, codes or other constraints holding you back. They are the lawless deputies of the Council. 

A Justicar are almost the opposite. They have a very strict Code that they ought to follow to a T. They cannot break this Code or make decisions outside of it. They rather commit suicide than breaking the strict Code that they follow.

 

Paragon plebs think Samara is rather renegade, but in truth Samara is the ultimate raragon. Spectres tend to be more renegade, they ought to be, because they are supposed to uphold galactic stability by any means necessary. 

Paragon Shepard is a horrible Spectre and doesn't have what it takes to be a true Spectre. Renegade Shepard is the only true and proper Spectre worthy of the title.

I agree.   Paragon Shepard always seemed like the odd man out when it came to the Spectres. So much so to the point that I can't believe the Council would even consider him.  If anything, they should have created a law abiding galactic police for the Paragons to join and the Spectres be for the Renegades.

[The Heretic of Time]

I'd say look towards ME2 for guidance on how Renegades should be. Only big decisions and denying quests should be the "evil" options.

 

Honestly, I don't get this. You're not the only one who says that ME2's renegade is how renegade should be, but I don't get this sentiment at all. Personally I thought ME2 had the worst implementation of the renegade path. ME2 had nothing memorable in terms of paragon versus renegade choices. Most of ME2's renegade path boiled down to cliché wild-west tough talk and some minor badassery, which is fine if that's your thing, but I was unimpressed by it.

I liked ME1's renegade path because it allowed me to be pro-human while mistrusting aliens.
I liked ME3's renegade path because it allowed me to do some serious questionable stuff that is not necessarily evil but definitely morally reprehensible.

ME2 had neither. I couldn't play pro-human, I could play pro-Cerberus but only by mixing it up with paragon dialogue options (because oddly enough the pro-Cerberus dialogue often flip-flops between sometimes being the paragon option and something being the renegade option) and none of the renegade choices in ME2 were particularly ruthless or callous (with the exception of leaving David hooked up to Project Overlord, which is the only memorable renegade decision in ME2). All in all very boring.

[In Exile]

ME2 gets love because ME1 and ME3 renegade choices - not dialogue options, but actual plot and charactsr choices - verged on the psychotic. There was a pretty flimsy justification in place for extreme violence, but it was rarely ever justifiable. ME3 has at least some support for a few of its renegade options, but not very often. In ME1, you were often just asked to be a psycho when it came to the plot.

At the same time, a paragade ME1 playthrough worked really well, as did a paragade ME2 and ME3 playthrough.

[Dabrikishaw]

Really, the truth is I've never had an issue with Renegade in all 3 games. I can easily just play a pure Renegade Shepard the whole trilogy.

[The Heretic of Time]

ME2 gets love because ME1 and ME3 renegade choices - not dialogue options, but actual plot and charactsr choices - verged on the psychotic. There was a pretty flimsy justification in place for extreme violence, but it was rarely ever justifiable. ME3 has at least some support for a few of its renegade options, but not very often. In ME1, you were often just asked to be a psycho when it came to the plot.

At the same time, a paragade ME1 playthrough worked really well, as did a paragade ME2 and ME3 playthrough.

 

Uhu... Can you name 3 "psycho" renegade decisions in ME1 and ME3 that didn't have good in-game justifications?

[KaiserShep]

Even some of the little things in ME2 were kind of out there. Like, when talking to Mouse on the Citadel, it's totally unnecessary for Shepard to stomp the guy in the middle of a public area like s/he's LAPD in 1987. I always thought it was kind of funny how Thane is all casual about him being brutalized. ME2 is easily the most psychotic of the lot in its Renegade path. At least in 3, these crazy factions are in an all-or-nothing dance of death with the machine apocalypse, and you're either dooming one to save another, or dooming one to [possibly] spare everyone massive grief based on pretty solid historical evidence later. There is at least one big Renegade decision that makes a great deal of sense in ME2: destroying the heretics. Rewrite my ass. They've been a pain in the quad forever. Time to take those crazy kids out of the game for good.

[Lady Artifice]

Justicars and Spectres are not alike though.

Being a Spectre means you're expected to get the job done without laws, codes or other constraints holding you back. They are the lawless deputies of the Council. 

A Justicar is almost the opposite. They have a very strict Code that they ought to follow to a T. They cannot break this Code or make decisions outside of it. They rather commit suicide than breaking the strict Code that they follow.

 

Paragon plebs think Samara is rather renegade, but in truth Samara is the ultimate paragon. Spectres tend to be more renegade, they ought to be, because they are supposed to uphold galactic stability by any means necessary. 

Paragon Shepard is a horrible Spectre and doesn't have what it takes to be a true Spectre. Renegade Shepard is the only true and proper Spectre worthy of the title.

 

Samara seems to disagree. The way she describes being a Justicar, it's a thing wholly apart from morality and compassion, themes that are pretty intrinsic to the paragon dynamic.