However, you can avoid any negative consequences from the Zaeed paragon choice and rewriting the heretics.
It is entirely possible, yet somewhat harder to achieve. I believe Zaeed dies if you don't handle that situation well, and you risk losing either the geth or quarians if you do something else wrong with the geth/quarians in ME2/3.
It is entirely possible, yet somewhat harder to achieve. I believe Zaeed dies if you don't handle that situation well, and you risk losing either the geth or quarians if you do something else wrong with the geth/quarians in ME2/3.
Zaeed's resulting death in ME3 is pretty lame though. I mean, he just dies…because of reasons?
Zaeed's resulting death in ME3 is pretty lame though. I mean, he just dies…because of reasons?
Didn't even think about that... That's probably because I like to have all of my squadmembers loyal.
The only meaningful way for Zaeed to die is to kill him in his own loyalty mission. Shepaard!
Isn't this an artifact of the trilogy structure to some extent? You can kill characters at the end of their storyline involvement as long as you don't have to care about bringing them back for a sequel. See, for instance, Wing Commander 3, which worked fine. Though WC4 retconned Vagabond's death if he died (only to kill him off), and made Rachael the canon LI since Flint might have died. (IIRC Maniac only dies on the losing path, and other WC3 characters either always die or don't come back.)
True- I'm just talking in the context of series with sequels. Dragon Age isn't a trilogy structure, but it has enough returning characters that it can stumble over the same problem. The really old 'I want my Warden to return', or the Leliana delimma.
Presumably because most of us didn't play Overlord, and aren't aware that there are any geth under Reaper control after Rannoch -- isn't that just an MP thing? Though, yeah, they could have worked geth back into the main narrative if Overlord was going to be accounted for. I guess they just didn't want to burn the wordcount.
Honestly? I'd have settled for a mention during the Cerberus scientist mission from Archer- who'd only talk about it if you did Overlord. They already burned word-count for suicide, which is an even smaller outcome.
It'd be kinda funny if Wrex killed Fist, too. "You're too late, kid; the guy you want died on Virmire."
Ha, good point.
It is entirely possible, yet somewhat harder to achieve. I believe Zaeed dies if you don't handle that situation well, and you risk losing either the geth or quarians if you do something else wrong with the geth/quarians in ME2/3.
The solution for both is just to be more Paragon more often. Whereas Renegade consequences rarely get better with more Renegade. (The one exception being the 'Mordin lives' route.)
The solution for both is just to be more Paragon more often.
That usually works for me 
.
Something I've noticed that happens a lot in RPG games like Mass Effect or Dragon Age or Fallout etc is that being a good person and helping people very nearly always works out to be you helping yourself which makes being a good person and helping people far too easy. What I mean is, you are presented with a "moral choice" but whether you choose to be good or bad, your own objectives are furthered in some way. Your choice matters little other than to serve to move your alignment meter in one direction or another. What I would like to see is an abundance of situations where taking the good guy route actually costs you in some way. You expend a bunch of extra ammo, it takes a lot longer, you get nothing more than a thank you as reward, that sort of stuff. The good guy who is always helping people should not also easily be the wealthiest man in the galaxy, as an example. It should be significantly harder to play a truly good character because being bad, robbing weak people and taking their supplies is a far easier option than helping them at your own expense.
Yeah...
I have no problem at all with good characters being compelled to do extra 'work,' but let's keep in mind what this product is.
It's a video game. A game. A product built to be beaten by players as young as 10, 11, 12 of considerably sub-par skill and intelligence.
Nothing in this product is going to be or should be a 'real' challenge or difficulty. This is a product meant to be enjoyed reclining on a couch in an air conditioned room. It's leisure. The concept of it being 'harder' is not going to stand up to any scrutiny. The good playthrough being 'harder' might well just mean more content.
As long as you understand that, sure.
Not even unintentional collateral- one of the common themes of paragon is the deliberate acceptance of risk in order to maintain moral integrity. The 'I won't let fear compromise who I am,' while the Renegade Big Decisions often take a precautionary approach. 'I accept this cost now, because if I don't bigger costs may come later'. Paragon morality was regularly a risk-taker bordering on the irresponsible.
The thing was, though, that the ME trilogy never had those risks materialize. It almost always kicked potential issues far into the future, while Renegade costs were immediate.
I think you've bought into the fantasy a little too heavily, friend.
If you want a game with 'real' consequences to choices, such consequences would come down considerably harder on evil playthroughs than good playthroughs.
As I've said in other threads Mass Effect, like pretty much all video games with choices, is a world with incredibly feeble opposition and nonexistent punishment to outrageous acts of evil. The protagonist is never seriously confronted or hindered no matter how many innocents he gleefully shoots in the face directly in front of people who've made it clear such an act is unforgiveable. The protagonist does what he wants, when he wants, on sheer power of being Just That Totally Badass. At worst, a companion makes a scene only to be smugly and promptly executed and tossed aside.
I don't begrudge video games for doing this. Games are first and foremost about fun, and as I've said many times now, nobody wants to play 'Sit-In-Prison-Simulator' no matter how overwhelmingly appropriate such a response would be.
But let's not go pretending this is what 'real' looks like.
Doesn't always work in Witcher 3. Tends to come back and bite you in the ass.
Actually I find TW 3 a lot more predictable when it comes to consequences of your moral decisions, than TW 2 or even DA 2 for example. I easily got the best result out of everything during that game, it was almost strange how logical it was.
Mass effect just needs some weird outcomes or making your hard work at times mean nothing.
I think you've bought into the fantasy a little too heavily, friend.
If you want a game with 'real' consequences to choices, such consequences would come down considerably harder on evil playthroughs than good playthroughs.
As I've said in other threads Mass Effect, like pretty much all video games with choices, is a world with incredibly feeble opposition and nonexistent punishment to outrageous acts of evil. The protagonist is never seriously confronted or hindered no matter how many innocents he gleefully shoots in the face directly in front of people who've made it clear such an act is unforgiveable. The protagonist does what he wants, when he wants, on sheer power of being Just That Totally Badass. At worst, a companion makes a scene only to be smugly and promptly executed and tossed aside.
I don't begrudge video games for doing this. Games are first and foremost about fun, and as I've said many times now, nobody wants to play 'Sit-In-Prison-Simulator' no matter how overwhelmingly appropriate such a response would be.
But let's not go pretending this is what 'real' looks like.
Well this doesn't really apply to Shepard for a variety of reasons.
Particularly in ME1 his actions are above the law as a Spectre, in ME2 his one truly unambiguously "evil" action, the destruction of the Alpha relay, will alwyas lead to his incarceration by the Alliance, only by the circumstances of the ME3 opening is he allowed to escape them.
He definitely faces consequences for his actions when appropriate, but the Council isn't going to raise a fuss over him being a little trigger happy in ME1, they've overlooked far larger transgressions, in ME2 he can still have spectre status or he is covered by the actions of Anderson. It gets a little ridiculous when the context shifts from the Terminus to Citadel space, gunning down a politician is the most obvious example.
But that really ignores the points being raised. Not many people are asking for more attention to be paid to "little" renegade decisions such as shaking down civilians and what not. The majority of complaints that I have seen have been towards a lack of effort put towards the "big" renegade decisions. Some of this is the result of the devs being unable to offer two truly different experiences as a matter of resources, but the fact that renegade options are consistently shafted can get a little trying. Why bother including two choices if only one of them is going to get any sort of attention?
Mass effect just needs some weird outcomes or making your hard work at times mean nothing.
Perhaps at very, very rare times.
The worst failing a writer can make is to be pointless. Pointlessness in pursuit of supposed 'realism' is stupidity.
Why bother including two choices if only one of them is going to get any sort of attention?
Simple. Because the success of one choice and the failure of another enunciates a theme.
Perhaps at very, very rare times.
The worst failing a writer can make is to be pointless. Pointlessness in pursuit of supposed 'realism' is stupidity.
It depends on your taste but yes I am talking about rare moments in the story. Making all decisions logical and having good outcomes is just weird and personally, it takes way the immersion.
Simple. Because the success of one choice and the failure of another enunciates a theme.
Are you going to try and argue that ME doesn't actually want to offer choices?
If they wanted to tell the paragon story and only the paragon story they'd do that, and they wouldn't have renegade options that DO work out on occassion such as the genophage sabotage under Wreav
Retour en haut