85 réponses à ce sujet

[ArabianIGoggles]

Beneficial because, as I said, pitifully feeble opposition and nonexistent punishment to evil. It's very easy to get your way when nobody bothers to do anything to oppose you but delicately whimper (yep, I said it again. whimper) that this is the wrong thing to do before promptly returning to following your every order. When murder is a trifling frivolity to be giggled over instead of, as Mr. Raymond Chandler puts it, "an act of infinite cruelty."

 

A world where nobody does anything significant to oppose you because you're Just That Badass.

 

Now then, that's a necessity for video games to function. But are you sure you want to try and argue with me that this is what 'realism' looks like?

 

 

When you give me arguments that would be laughed out of any courtroom, you might want to try and pretty them up just a little beforehand. At least try and give them a semblance of legitimancy.

You said justified.  Wife wanted revenge.  She got it.  Now all of a sudden it's what's justifiable in a courtroom setting?  Make up your mind.

[Drone223]

No, you're missing the point. And the point is you've bought into the fantasy a little too heavily. You think (or are pretending to think) that because your character can get his way by shouting a lot and pointing guns at people, that's how morality works. The rest of the world just shrugs its collective shoulders and mumbles "Well gosh...I guess we just have to let him do what he wants..." before obediently standing aside.

 

An indulgent fantasy, and a fun one. One actively encouraged by dialogue from BioWare.

 

But make no mistake - this is pretend morality.

Your mistaking ruthless and pragmatic with being a dick, ruthless and pragmatic actions tend to have reasoning behind their actions because they seek gain something by doing so. Being a dick is well basically doing actions for the lolz for no reason what-so-ever giving no thought into the consequences of their actions.

[AlanC9]

That's the problem with Renegade, though -- it includes both.

[BabyPuncher]

Ruthless and pragmatic actions tend to have reasoning behind their actions because they seek gain something by doing so.

 

There's no end of potential evil actions that have some sort of reasoning or opportunity of gain behind them. Does that makes any difference? Then the rest of the world is willing to shrug it's shoulders and say "Gosh, it's evil, but I guess we can't do anything because he benefited from it..."

[N7Jamaican]

I agree, re-work the paragon and renegade system.  Not all paragon choices are good, just like not all renegade are bad.

[Drone223]

There's no end of potential evil actions that have some sort of reasoning or opportunity of gain behind them. Does that makes any difference? Then the rest of the world is willing to shrug it's shoulders and say "Gosh, it's evil, but I guess we can't do anything because he benefited from it..."

Ruthless/pragmatic =/= evil

 

Ruthless and evil can be mutually exclusive which is whole point of what renegade is suppose to be getting the job done no matter the cost by any means necessary. Ruthless protagonist are anti-hero's since they lack the qualities of an idealistic protagonist but at the same time they're clearly not evil.

[Former_Fiend]

I remember Yahtzee once described the theory of the Paragon/Renegade system as not so much being good vs evil, but the difference between playing as Captain Picard and Dirty Harry.

 

I don't know if it ever really got there in practice. 

[Ahglock]

The problem with the paragon/renegade system for me is not so much the big actions.  Saving the council, killing the whatever, stopping the thing all work out fine in the system.  It breaks down in party interaction(dude my son just died..Shepard "stop crying you punk its just a son, does the little princess need a hug." That never strikes me as renegade, practical or realistic, it just being a jerk and a bad leader to a impractical level.), side quests where just doing it gets paragon/renegade when people play the games to do the quests and random points thrown at you for doing something basic(replaying ME1 and at virmire all the things you do to help the distraction team get you paragon points, but you literally have to go out of your way to avoid bumping into the communications tower etc so of course you are going to flip the switch to stop it),

[Hrulj]

Not necessarily.

 

While I'm all for the renegade choices not always backfiring, renegade or its equivalent shouldn't always result in better results than paragon or its equivalent either. It should be balanced.

 

Ruthlessness isn't always pragmatic, and has backfired as much throughout history as it has succeeded. It really depends on the situation.

 

But my problem with it is that along the way Renegade changed from a pragmatic person to just a jerk who is a huge di*k to everyone around him. Renegades should be manipulative. Paragons should be compasionate.

Example: "My wife was killed by X"

Paragon: I understand your pain

Renegade: We'll make them pay

 

But so far all we have is:

P: I understand your pain

R: Cry me a river

 

I see no reason why a renegade would tell that person to just stop being a pu**y, when he gains nothing except hostility for it. 

 

They should be pragmatic and get better results than a paragon, with the downside that they dont feel that nice in the end about themselves. That is what would make it a hard choice. 

If we find a wallet in real life with a few thousands in it, it would be a paragon option to return it and seek the owner. What do you gain from that? Probably nothing, but you feel nice about yourself

Renegade would be keeping the wallet, you gain money. You dont gain moral satisfaction. That is all. Very simple, and could actualy be tempting. 

 

Your mistaking ruthless and pragmatic with being a dick, ruthless and pragmatic actions tend to have reasoning behind their actions because they seek gain something by doing so. Being a dick is well basically doing actions for the lolz for no reason what-so-ever giving no thought into the consequences of their actions.

This. While Paragon isnt done to badly, renegade has been mutilated, to a point where entire meaning changed. Some renegade options were done well, especialy in ME2, with the gunship repairman, zaeeds mission, the Tuchanka Krogan and Miranda loyalty mission. That is what renegade is about, not shooting yourself in the foot.

 

Also, some choices being marked as Paragon or Renegade, even though they arent either - IE: Rewriting or Deleting Heretics, or chosing Quarians or Geth

[Helios969]

In general, I agree it needs to be reevaluated and balanced.  Certain situations call for diplomacy, others...say more expediency.  There should be pros and cons to either approach.  However, the player should absolutely not be locked out of a conversation option for not having enough points in one or the other (cough, ME2, cough).  Meaning I should be able to take a more neutral approach to my leadership using diplomacy where it fits or a more blunt, brute force approach when I think it appropriate.  I also would really like a humorous dialogue option as humor can be an effective tool.

 

Additionally I'd like companions and main NPC's to be reactive to the way we roleplay.  If a character type doesn't respect diplomacy/pragmatism, it should create a barrier (perhaps insurmountable) to establishing a friendship and/or romance (where applicable).  If you're dealing with a local Warlord who runs a faction who respects strength and aggression, you should not be able to win the faction to your side by "charming" them.  Maybe the Warlord puts a captured enemy in front of you to execute.  You choice is gain their support by performing the execution or refusing and losing the opportunity.  Then of course there should be reverse situations as well where only behaving as a "Paragon of virtue" wins the day, perhaps being done via a spy who evaluates your behavior and decisions over a certain block of the game to determine if you're "worthy."

[Anacronian Stryx]

I really hope there will be no Paragon/Renegade system - it's time Mass Effect evolved to a more mature system of cause and effect.

[Helios969]

I really hope there will be no Paragon/Renegade system - it's time Mass Effect evolved to a more mature system of cause and effect.

Well I think you need some kind of system to help facilitate the roleplaying experience...so we respond in a way that is consistent with the persona we adopt.  It doesn't need to be a red/blue point system though as in the past.  There was little to like about DA2, but I thought the 3 different personality type responses (and locking in) was the best.  My opinion of course.

 

Although I hope no matter what they do they keep P/R interrupts.  Many of my favorite moments were stimulated by those.

[Anacronian Stryx]

Well I think you need some kind of system to help facilitate the roleplaying experience...so we respond in a way that is consistent with the persona we adopt.  It doesn't need to be a red/blue point system though as in the past.  There was little to like about DA2, but I thought the 3 different personality type responses (and locking in) was the best.  My opinion of course.

 

Although I hope no matter what they do they keep P/R interrupts.  Many of my favorite moments were stimulated by those.

You do not "adopt" a persona when you roleplay - you make your own persona, there is a big difference.

[mickey111]

Well I think you need some kind of system to help facilitate the roleplaying experience...so we respond in a way that is consistent with the persona we adopt.  It doesn't need to be a red/blue point system though as in the past.  There was little to like about DA2, but I thought the 3 different personality type responses (and locking in) was the best.  My opinion of course.

 

Although I hope no matter what they do they keep P/R interrupts.  Many of my favorite moments were stimulated by those.

 

 

No, that system is a relic from a bygone era. There are two problems with the old paragon/renegade system as I see it: one of them is a limit of mass effect trilogy been based on relatively dated tech, and the other limit is biowares ability to make the player understand what each of the player character reactions will be in advanced to selecting them.

 

look at what more modern games such as witcher 3 and tomb raider are capable of. these games would under no circumstances require a numbers display to indicate to us what characters think or feel, because the characters facial animation is just so good that you can figure out what they're thinking just by the look on their faces. You see someones eyes water and throat muscles swell up when they get emotional, you see their forehead wrinkle when they're concentrating, you see them sweat when they get anxious. 

 

As for the other problem, perhaps we could be given the option to confirm our characters response. By this I mean the ability to confirm or cancel the chosen optional reply from the list. so you pick renegade and maybe the player could be prompted if they approve or not after shepard has said what he had to say, and if the player likes it the scene keeps on going on, if not then back to the selection list? 

[Mcfly616]

Or maybe just throw it out all together. I don't need color-coded dialogue wheels to tell me that I'm being a dick.

[Cyberstrike nTo]

I'd rather the whole system be removed and replaced with the approval system of Dragon Age.

 

Morality is rarely ever binary like the Paragon/Renegade system tries to make it into.

 

While I agree that Paragon/Renegade thing needs to be either totally revamped or removed. I'm not sure the approval system in the Dragon Age series is any better since it IMHO it feels like it is little more than a popularity contest between the PC and the various squad mates. 

[KaiserShep]

While I agree that Paragon/Renegade thing needs to be either totally revamped or removed. I'm not sure the approval system in the Dragon Age series is any better since it IMHO it feels like it is little more than a popularity contest between the PC and the various squad mates. 

 

I think it's certainly better than companions simply being unaffected by anything you do and acting like they're your closest friends no matter what. In a setting with a proper chain of command, you can disregard their feelings and they will still follow orders, but just won't have any friendly personal dialogue if you drive their dispositions in the negative.

[Helios969]

No, that system is a relic from a bygone era. There are two problems with the old paragon/renegade system as I see it: one of them is a limit of mass effect trilogy been based on relatively dated tech, and the other limit is biowares ability to make the player understand what each of the player character reactions will be in advanced to selecting them.

 

look at what more modern games such as witcher 3 and tomb raider are capable of. these games would under no circumstances require a numbers display to indicate to us what characters think or feel, because the characters facial animation is just so good that you can figure out what they're thinking just by the look on their faces. You see someones eyes water and throat muscles swell up when they get emotional, you see their forehead wrinkle when they're concentrating, you see them sweat when they get anxious. 

 

As for the other problem, perhaps we could be given the option to confirm our characters response. By this I mean the ability to confirm or cancel the chosen optional reply from the list. so you pick renegade and maybe the player could be prompted if they approve or not after shepard has said what he had to say, and if the player likes it the scene keeps on going on, if not then back to the selection list? 

I only meant to get across that when I want my character to respond in a certain fashion...diplomatic, snarky, ruthless, that my character responds accordingly.  As far as any kind of point system, I don't really care...but I do want a world that reacts positively or negatively to me depending on the disposition of my character relative to other characters and different societies I might encounter...though I'm not sure how one goes about implementing such.

[AlanC9]

Or maybe just throw it out all together. I don't need color-coded dialogue wheels to tell me that I'm being a dick.

The color-coding does help you to know when you're about to be a dick, though.

[Sylvius the Mad]

The color-coding does help you to know when you're about to be a dick, though.

Except it doesn't, because Paragon and Renegade were imprecisely defined.

[God]

No, you're missing the point. And the point is you've bought into the fantasy a little too heavily. You think (or are pretending to think) that because your character can get his way by shouting a lot and pointing guns at people, that's how morality works. The rest of the world just shrugs its collective shoulders and mumbles "Well gosh...I guess we just have to let him do what he wants..." before obediently standing aside.

 

An indulgent fantasy, and a fun one. One actively encouraged by dialogue from BioWare.

 

But make no mistake - this is pretend morality.

 

I don't know, Vladimir Putin is doing it pretty effectively. Bush did it pretty well. Whenever the Kim's decide they want something, they do this.

 

Just last week, China did some very 'immoral' and 'unethical' things just because they could. The WBC does it semi-regularly. So does the NRA and the Tea Party.

 

Donald Trump is doing it, and the American people can't get enough of him right now.

 

I don't believe in your interpretation of morality David, and not many others do either. Society certainly doesn't.

[AlanC9]

Except it doesn't, because Paragon and Renegade were imprecisely defined.

Well, I did only say "help" there.

[Sylvius the Mad]

Well, I did only say "help" there.

I think they were counter-productive.

Initially, all they helped me do was pick the wrong option with greater confidence. Once I realized that was happening, I then had tremendous uncertainty, as I thought the Paragon and Renegade designations were intended to tell me something, but I didn't know what it was. So I made every selection fully aware that I might be missing some vital piece of information the writers had expected me to have.

[Laughing_Man]

A cheating husband getting castrated by the wife is justifiable.

 

Really? According to who? And what about a cheating wife, what is "justified" for the husband to do to her?

 

I suppose that under the same logic a thief losing a hand for a theft is justified as well.

 

The justification to stone or burn people for "witchcraft" or homosexual behaviour is just around the corner.

[mickey111]

Really? According to who? And what about a cheating wife, what is "justified" for the husband to do to her?

 

I suppose that under the same logic a thief losing a hand for a theft is justified as well.

 

The justification to stone or burn people for "witchcraft" or homosexual behaviour is just around the corner.

 

according to arabs. 

 

and they do at least two of those things. Its not without merit, people are going to be more obedient and lawful if they can expect such harsh justice. keeps more people out of jail, more tax payer money for other stuff. They don't chop your hands off in american prisons because that would make you less able for the slave labor that the almost inescapable privatized prisons have become. The american justice system is a disaster.