73 réponses à ce sujet

[Statichands]

As you guys know, I've been playing a lot of MGS5 lately and there's one thing I don't like about this game, Demon Snake. Basically you eventually turn into Demon Snake if you do certain things in the game and it really limits your experience until you get down to the bottom of it and understand how it works. 

 

Mass Effect has a problem like this as well. I've almost played through the ME series twice now and I've always felt forced to go extreme Paragon just to prevent certain things from happening in the game. Why can't I say a couple of words just because I don't have a certain amount of Paragon points? All the choices are simplified to paragon and renegade, blue and red, you don't really have to think. It's all just blue blue blue or red red red. Quit with the limitations.

[wolfsite]

This was fixed in ME3.

 

In ME3 many decisions gave neutral points allowing more freedom in choices and major choices relied and your total reputation points so you could play through getting all Paragon points but you could still get Renegade dialogue options.

[Liamv2]

People have been asking for this **** since the original Kotor possibly earlier than that. At least Dragon age does it.

[Angry_Elcor]

They can't get rid of that! How will I know whether I'm an altruistic saint or a badass mofo wearing shades?

[Catastrophy]

They can't get rid of that! How will I know whether I'm an altruistic saint or a badass mofo wearing shades?

The substrate on/in which we find the Elcor's foot imprints might be an indication.

[saladinbob]

It's been said many times, the Paragon/Renegade system is anachronistic game play and needs scrapping. Bioware need to freshen their games up rather than sticking to the same outdated formulas. Let's hope Andromeda is the envelope pushing game for the genre many of us hope it will be.

[BioWareM0d13]

I think they should scrap it, and instead do something similar to how DA:I handled dialogue.

[Mcfly616]

Couldn't just comment on one of the dozens of preexisting threads discussing this...

[BloodyMares]

Replace it. Morality is irrelevant. "It's not who I am underneath, but what I do that defines me". Your reputation shouldn't be based on points but rather certain actions you did/didn't do. I will always bring up an example of Chorban and Jahleed. Chorban reacts differently to your presence if you have spoken with him previously. Same goes to Ashley/Kadian's fate in ME3 depending on if you have visited them every time. They need to do more things like that. As for dialogues, I think they should change it to something based on influence and each character would have those 'influence checks' that need to be met in order to be able to influence those characters. Some characters might be inspired by your heroics and bravery, some by your neutrality/ ability to resolve conflicts, some by your renegade-style badassery, some by your intelligence and some might even take pity on you if you have a tragic experience. In some cases it should be difficult to predict how certain characters would react. But I think the general rule of thumb should be like this: if you're mean to everybody then it's unlikely that people would like to listen to you but if you're friendly then you have better chances to appeal to a character. Although it looks like this is too complicated.

[ZipZap2000]

Mass Effect has a problem like this as well. I've almost played through the ME series twice now.........Why can't I say a couple of words just because I don't have a certain amount of Paragon points?.

You should really get it by the second run.

Paragon options are for people who take the paragon path and choose to create that kind of personality.

A kind of 'Paragon' if you will.


The same can be said of your renegade options.

A sort of 'Renegade' character.


You have to choose which path you take, if you choose a path too neutral you will have created a neutral personality meaning you wont have enough points because of your decisions.

We'll call those choices.


The 'Choices' you make will determine the in game personality for your Shepard, if you choose not to go the path of a 'Paragon' you will not get those options. You will instead be given the options from the 'Renegade' path. Unless you've played the game from a point of neutrality.

This is a problem because playing out as a neutral Shepard has absolutely no special benefit to the player at all.

So maybe the solution is to give the neutral player a benefit. Some kind of diplomatic mind control power or green prompt, that allows them to negotiate reasonable terms. Or a post on the Citadel or Pacific Islands at the end of the game, as a reward for successfully prosecuting your neutralist, centrist philosophy or pacifist movement.

You could move up in rank with each installment as you gradually work your way up the ladder to eventually become councillor Udina's Junior Assistant or coffee dispenser. Working for free to avoid an industrial dispute over drone labour.

This will allow players to experience the thrills and spills of not really caring either way. Or the glory of not actually caring at all. While still being able to tell themselves things like:

Hey, you earned that coffee cup.

Or

Where's my burrito?

Knowing they sorta did the right thing around the time they were ready to do it in. But where does that leave us in terms of the current state of the current installment? They've likely already decided on a system and will likely stick with it, like we likely would if we were likely to do such things.

We'll call this 'Alike'

So people are essentially in limbo, they will likely never have a neutral option or a Galaxy's Greatest Middleman mug and will likely never find out what happened to their long lost Burrito.

Ah, humans we're not so alike after all.

These not so brave but not cowardly either people are on a quest to find someone 'alike' and in the absence of such a place, to find such people, they deserve to be able to create such a world; represented in a character who finally represents them.

Wether bioware likes it or not.

Which is why I highly recommend you play this game on a pc. Modders will have a solution to your problem and if you doubt what they can do you need only look toward the thought provoking, heart warming and ultimately superior ending they created after EA murdered Casey Hudson and had him replaced with a replica robot.

TL;DR

Google MEHEM bro you'll see what I'm talking about.

[SerriceIceDandy]

I think it could simply be improved by having the consequences of Paragon vs Renegade mixed up a bit. If the balance of consequences of Renegade options turned out to be for the greater good than the Paragon it would seem more viable. Perhaps if sometimes the consequences would be hypothesised to us at the time of the decision, it would make it harder to choose. You want to do what's best based on your opinion, but at what cost?

I believe that's what was originally intended, but more often than not it actually felt more like choosing between being an Interstellar ****-bag or Space Jesus. Which is a very reductive few of morality. Two of the notable exceptions I can think of is the Tuchanka and Rannoch Arcs.

 

But, I agree it's hard to make an effective morality system on just objective views on good or bad. Perhaps enter a new character variable of pragmatism vs idealism? 

[Eleonora]

I'm a bit conflicted about this. On the one hand, I liked the paragon/renegade system because it looked iconic for Mass Effect, and showed that there are several ways Shepard can be played and interpreted. I don't, however, like the restrictions that come with the system (especially after having played DA for a while). A neutral character was basically punished in ME2 (unless you didn't mind not being able to choose the blue/red dialogue options), and it was not even an option in ME3.

 

I personally think the paragon/renegade system should stay, though not as a restricting system with only two options, but only as a spectrum to show the protagonist's degree of pragmatism/idealism.

[MissOuJ]

I'm a bit conflicted about this. On the one hand, I liked the paragon/renegade system because it looked iconic for Mass Effect, and showed that there are several ways Shepard can be played and interpreted. I don't, however, like the restrictions that come with the system (especially after having played DA for a while). A neutral character was basically punished in ME2 (unless you didn't mind not being able to choose the blue/red dialogue options), and it was not even an option in ME3.

 

I personally think the paragon/renegade system should stay, though not as a restricting system with only two options, but only as a spectrum to show the protagonist's degree of pragmatism/idealism.

 

Exactly this.

 

The main problem I have with ME's "morality" system is that it reinforces that sort of Light Side vs Dark Side or Good vs Evil dualism which is outdated, unrealistic and some times even irrational - my only options to deal with terrorists shouldn't be "Hug it out" and "Nuke it from orbit" without any options in between.

 

And besides, if there absolutely needs to be a "morality" system or something like it, it should be taken into account that sometimes people with good intentions make decisions that end up hurting more than helping, and that sometimes the opposite is true and the people with the absolutely worse intentions end up helping when they were supposed to hurt. ME3 had this to some extent but not nearly enough IMO.

 

I would absolutely love a "personality" meter (with many different "axis") which is separated from the in-world decisions and which would open up different dialogue opportunities / reactions / follower responses to decisions and events, combined with a system where each decision / action has a possible positive (also neutral?) and negative result, which are determined randomly. That would make each playthrough interesting. Then again, that kind of system would probably feel a bit "unfair" from the players' perspective at times, and it would probably be an absolute nightmare to program and write dialogue / quests / story content for, so I'm not holding my breath.

[capn233]

Hmmm.

 

The only game of the three where you needed to go heavily to one direction or the other for charm / intimidate dialogue was ME2.  And if you had import bonuses that was minimized further.

 

ME3 didn't work that way at all, and just did generic rep, which honestly was pointless.

 

ME1's system really wasn't that bad, and you were free to invest in whichever form of persuasion you wanted.  The actual morality points had a small affect, but also determined some ancillary bonuses and which alignment based side mission you received.  If there were more alignment based missions, this system would probably be the best... as long as we are keeping a rep system at all.  The real reason it was scrapped was likely to simplify the talent / power tree.

 

In any case, I don't care if alignment disappeared for MEA.  Approval like in DAI was alright with respect to squaddies.

[Eleonora]

Exactly this.

 

The main problem I have with ME's "morality" system is that it reinforces that sort of Light Side vs Dark Side or Good vs Evil dualism which is outdated, unrealistic and some times even irrational - my only options to deal with terrorists shouldn't be "Hug it out" and "Nuke it from orbit" without any options in between.

 

And besides, if there absolutely needs to be a "morality" system or something like it, it should be taken into account that sometimes people with good intentions make decisions that end up hurting more than helping, and that sometimes the opposite is true and the people with the absolutely worse intentions end up helping when they were supposed to hurt. ME3 had this to some extent but not nearly enough IMO.

 

I would absolutely love a "personality" meter (with many different "axis") which is separated from the in-world decisions and which would open up different dialogue opportunities / reactions / follower responses to decisions and events, combined with a system where each decision / action has a possible positive (also neutral?) and negative result, which are determined randomly. That would make each playthrough interesting. Then again, that kind of system would probably feel a bit "unfair" from the players' perspective at times, and it would probably be an absolute nightmare to program and write dialogue / quests / story content for, so I'm not holding my breath.

 

I agree. Seeing more variation in how paragon/renegade decisions play out (good intentions that occasionally lead to worse scenarios than a more pragmatic approach) would be nice. Like you said, paragon and renegade aren't equal to good and bad, after all.

 

I'm not sure about bringing random chance into the dialogue system. It seems interesting in theory and gets rid of the usual "high persuasion=instant win" mechanic, but in reality most of us would be constantly reloading the nearest save after failing to convince someone. Not always being able to win everything (both in dialogue and battle) would be a nice change though.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Remove the insta-wins. Make everything shades of gray.

[WarGriffin]

The problem with the Morality systems of bioware is No matter how hard they try

 

They do just end up making

Blue = Heroic

Red = You're a Villainous *******

 

Jade Empire

 

Closed Fist is pragamatic , scheming but is not without thought or emotion... come the end of the game though

 

Yeah you're enslaving all your companions out a a need to have absolute control, stealing the power of a god for your own selfish wants etc etc

 

 

If they want to keep the Morality systems... They need to actually look at the choices and not develop a Bias toward one or the other or a habit of having binary choice for the sake of having that choice. -Seriously THERE IS NO LOGICAL REASON TO HAVE A CHOICE BETWEEN SAMARA

 AND MORINTH

Usually Paragon choies are clearly favored by the staff

 

 

Basically they need to rethink their approach to the system.

 

and get out of the rut of

 

Paragon = Talk it out

Renegade = Shoot people till the problem resolves itself 

[Xerxes52]

I think they should scrap it, and instead do something similar to how DA:I handled dialogue.

 

That would be nice, especially the whole "stoic, angry, sad, confused, etc." reaction wheel.

[SerriceIceDandy]

I think they should scrap it, and instead do something similar to how DA:I handled dialogue.

 

 

That would be nice, especially the whole "stoic, angry, sad, confused, etc." reaction wheel.

 

That would probably be best - it would allow each individual character to respond to a situation in a manner that they see fit. I can't really recall the games pointing out my Paragon/Renegade score, but rather responding to the actual decision. The reputation system to me, seemed mostly redundant. 

[Wulfram]

It confuses me that people keep complaining about something ME3 already fixed. Paragon/Renegade was only cosmetic in ME3

[capn233]

Usually Paragon choies are clearly favored by the staff

 

Not really.

[PhroXenGold]

While it's not perfect, I will agree that ME3 resolved many of the flaws with the system. But as for my overall thoughts:

There should never be rewards for taking pushing a character to the extremes of a morality system, as this promotes unrealistic characters, and gameplay that is contrary to roleplaying - you should be picking the option because it is what your character would do, not because you get a bonus for picking all red. And I suppose that I'd also be against reward people for being in any specific place on the scale, as again, you're promoting picking answers based on the alignment shift they give instead of what the actual activity is.

The Paragon/Renegade split actually worked reasonably well for the most part, given the caveat that we were, ultimately, playing a hero and that going full evil makes no sense in the story of ME. There were a few times when Renegade fell a bit too much into being a dick, but in general, it showed the split between doing the "right" thing to serve the immediate good (Paragon) and doing potentially "less good" actions in order to serve the greater good (Renegade), combined with a respect/disrespect for authority respectively pretty well. To this day, there are several decisions where I don't know what the "right" answer is (in a moral sense), and plenty more where I can see the arguments in favour of the choice I wouldn't make. Compared to, say, JE's system of "good" and "evil trying to justify itself with bad philosophy", it is a massive step forward. Keeping the system, both as a guide to what the general approach a particular option will have, and as a record of how my character has behaved, is fine in my book, provided said record doesn't actually affect my character in any way - by all means have it affect how others view my character, but being prepared to sacrifice a few lives to save hundreds shouldn't make my scars glow. I wouldn't mind it being removed, but I don't see any real reason to, provided they base ME:A's system on ME3's and not its predeccsors'

There are some improvements I would make though.

First off, not every decision should be between Paragon and Renegade. The worst example was Legion's loyalty mission where, by the standards of everything else in the game, both options were Renegade, yet because someone had decided that every decision had to be a choice between the two alignments, one of them is labelled as Paragon. As much as I love the actual decision, it would've been even better if both were coloured red, if it made it clear you were in a position where there was no "good" option. Conversely, I'm sure there are plenty of situations where there isn't really a renegade option. Sometimes there should be a choice between a "neutral" option and one of the alignments, instead of having three possible outcomes. And so on.

Secondly, I'd like tone and action to be a bit more disassociated. You should be able to be a paragon and act or speak agressively, and a renegade who acts or speaks diplomatically. It's a pretty minor example, but it really irritated me - in ME1, when you go back to the Citadel the last time, you can run across a Terra Firma rally. The Paragon option - the one that crticises their racism - is extremely diplomatic (I respect your right to hold that opinion...). I really really want a way to put forward a paragon opinion in an aggressive manner (**** off you racist bigots). This did seem to improve somewhat over the course of the series.

Paragon/Renegade options should not always be the right ones. In ME, if you have a special coloured option in dialogue, it is pretty much always better than the normal uncoloured ones. Get rid of this. Sometimes the special option should be good. Sometimes it should be worse.

Going Paragon should backfire on you more often. This is a general flaw of Bioware's writing in multiple games, and not a specifically Paragon/Renegade thing, but if you've a choice between those two general attitudes of "immediate good" and "greater good", the Paragon one almost always ends up better, or at worse the same, and those few where it doesn't are pretty minor. There should be more occasions when serving the greater good is the "right" option. It shouldn't always work out this way by any means, we don't want to be stupidly grimdark, but it gets really boring when you can just go through playing an idealistic fool with no consequences.

[Guanxii]

Mass Effect should eventually get rid of morality completely in favor of a faction based loyalty system and bring back the speech skill tree and give it typically paragon or typically renegade gameplay options (but not exclusive) on each branch e.g.

 

Human 50%  Salarian 9%  Turian 15%  Krogan 12%  Asari 39%  Geth 50%,  Quarian 11%,  Batarian -25%

 

Krogan 12% favorability gives you a 12% chance of passing speech checks with Krogan characters. High level faction quests require a high degree of trust which has to be earned through completion of quests. However completing more quests for krogan characters can negatively effect favorability with Turian characters (arouses suspicion) and vice versa. High favorability unlocks perks/rewards, e.g. gear, powers, a house. Low favorability can result in wanted bounties as in RDR.

 

Favorability affects prices from merchants, npc dialogue and negative favorability attracts hostility. Most Batarians are raiders and slavers so naturally completing Batarian quests while lucrative usually involves directly undermining the other settlements so prepare to be hated.

 

Speech Skill tree

 

Level 4    Intimidation based Barter or charm based Barter speech options

Level 5    Intimidation interrupts or charm interrupts (longer you wait the more extreme)

Level 6    Charisma based or Intelligence based persuasion options.

 

Charisma based characters gain a wider spectrum of romance related speech options but intelligent characters level up faster and gain more income from missions. Intelligent characters could have a high favorability multiplier with Salarians, Quarians and Geth, while charisma characters could have a lower general multiplier with every other faction.

 

Pro-tip: Krogans love renegade interrupts and general assertions of dominance. Geth not so much. Couple of headbutts with some charisma multipliers and you're golden. The gameplay potential of a faction system is so much more multifaceted than an arbitrary binary morality system. 

[Dunestorm]

As you guys know, I've been playing a lot of MGS5 lately and there's one thing I don't like about this game, Demon Snake. Basically you eventually turn into Demon Snake if you do certain things in the game and it really limits your experience until you get down to the bottom of it and understand how it works. 

 

Mass Effect has a problem like this as well. I've almost played through the ME series twice now and I've always felt forced to go extreme Paragon just to prevent certain things from happening in the game. Why can't I say a couple of words just because I don't have a certain amount of Paragon points? All the choices are simplified to paragon and renegade, blue and red, you don't really have to think. It's all just blue blue blue or red red red. Quit with the limitations.

I'm pretty sure the team are far enough in development where they may not be able to change it. The only real change I'd make is instead of simply greying out unavailable conversations; allow us to risk them on chance based levels. For example, the requirement to make a paragon check might be say 50 points. If I have 49 points then I should have a really good chance of making that decision. If I have 5 points, then I am still able to make the check but it's unlikely I'd pass it.

 

Obviously if we have enough paragon/renegade points for the decision it should still be a 100% pass rate, but make it clear

[Zekka]

By this point, I'd be super surprised if they keep it in or don't scrap it for Andromeda. With all the bad press that paragon/renegade gets here and how other games in the industry are going away from using a good/bad system, it would be weird for Bioware to keep the old trends.