Questa discussione ha avuto 99 risposte

[Monica21]

Well, why let the fear of the reapers compromise who they are with that batarian colony then? That defeatist "the reapers will just kill everyone here anyway so I'll destroy the relay" attitude seems very out of character for super paragons; especially when factoring in the potential ethical issues mentioned in the OP.

And I still disagree with this. What's a Paragon Shepard's justification for risking the rest of the galaxy? Your intent, throughout the entire series, is to defeat the Reapers. Are you suggesting that a Paragon Shepard would just leave the system and inform the Council that the Reapers are here and oh-by-the-way could have stopped the invasion early but didn't?

You don't know that you'll be locked up for six months and you don't know that the rest of the galaxy won't prepare. You don't know that people in a position to do something about it will still refuse to listen to you. All you know as that if you don't stop the Reapers at that point then the invasion has started. I don't see how that's a Paragon or Renegade decision at all. You have to stop the Reapers. That's your job.

[congokong]

And I still disagree with this. What's a Paragon Shepard's justification for risking the rest of the galaxy? Your intent, throughout the entire series, is to defeat the Reapers. Are you suggesting that a Paragon Shepard would just leave the system and inform the Council that the Reapers are here and oh-by-the-way could have stopped the invasion early but didn't?

You don't know that you'll be locked up for six months and you don't know that the rest of the galaxy won't prepare. You don't know that people in a position to do something about it will still refuse to listen to you. All you know as that if you don't stop the Reapers at that point then the invasion has started. I don't see how that's a Paragon or Renegade decision at all. You have to stop the Reapers. That's your job.

A pure paragon will not taint their honor no matter the stakes. If the batarians are going to die, the reapers would have to be the ones to do it. Shepard wouldn't hit the red button. Arrival forces Shepard to play the ends justify the means game (renegade), resulting in many people (especially batarians) hating Shepard.

 

It's the same situation with the Collector base. "I won't let fear compromise who I am." Shepard is throwing away what could be the key to stopping the reapers because of its unethical origins and potential distrust of Cerberus.

[congokong]

You might be interested in watching the introduction to my current playthrough where I go into precisely this issue when discussing who my "canon" Shepard is and why she is that way.

Wow. That's quite the coincidence. You addressed the points I brought up in this thread (Arrival, that conversation with Garrus in ME3). My canon also happens to be a colonist/ruthless Shepard. That backstory alone I feel is the best combination for not only being interesting, but giving motivations for why Shepard is the way they are. Ruthless also is the only service history which gives you a personality type. Basically, you'd never choose ruthless but play paragon. The same can't be said for sole survivor or war hero. Renegade also just feels the most realistic. People die, things go wrong, Shepard isn't the white knight here to save everyone, etc.

[Monica21]

A pure paragon will not taint their honor no matter the stakes. If the batarians are going to die, the reapers would have to be the ones to do it. Shepard wouldn't hit the red button. Arrival forces Shepard to play the ends justify the means game (renegade), resulting in many people (especially batarians) hating Shepard.
 
It's the same situation with the Collector base. "I won't let fear compromise who I am." Shepard is throwing away what could be the key to stopping the reapers because of its unethical origins and potential distrust of Cerberus.

And I still disagree. "Stand amongst the ashes of a trillion dead souls and ask the ghosts if honor matters."

But, how is leaving the system a matter of Shepard being more honorable? If anything, there's less honor in that. There's cowardice in that. That's, "I don't want to make this decision so I won't make any decision." That doesn't have anything to do with Paragon or Renegade. Just because Shepard can say that he didn't kill those Batarians himself doesn't mean he's not responsible for their deaths. Leaving the system means that he's also responsible for all the deaths on Day 2 of the Reaper Invasion, and Day 3, and Day 4, etc.

[Natureguy85]

A pure paragon will not taint their honor no matter the stakes. If the batarians are going to die, the reapers would have to be the ones to do it. Shepard wouldn't hit the red button. Arrival forces Shepard to play the ends justify the means game (renegade), resulting in many people (especially batarians) hating Shepard.

 

Good doesn't have to equal stupid...

 

 

 

It's the same situation with the Collector base. "I won't let fear compromise who I am." Shepard is throwing away what could be the key to stopping the reapers because of its unethical origins and potential distrust of Cerberus.

 

But sometimes it does. I initially destroyed the base for the second reason, but Shepard only brings up the first. Blowing up the base doesn't bring anyone back and studying it doesn't require throwing more people in the blender. If that were the case, you'd have a real ethical question on it.

 

 

 

 

 Basically, you'd never choose ruthless but play paragon. The same can't be said for sole survivor or war hero. Renegade also just feels the most realistic. People die, things go wrong, Shepard isn't the white knight here to save everyone, etc.

 

What if you were playing some sort of redemption story?

[congokong]

And I still disagree. "Stand amongst the ashes of a trillion dead souls and ask the ghosts if honor matters."

But, how is leaving the system a matter of Shepard being more honorable? If anything, there's less honor in that. There's cowardice in that. That's, "I don't want to make this decision so I won't make any decision." That doesn't have anything to do with Paragon or Renegade. Just because Shepard can say that he didn't kill those Batarians himself doesn't mean he's not responsible for their deaths. Leaving the system means that he's also responsible for all the deaths on Day 2 of the Reaper Invasion, and Day 3, and Day 4, etc.

You just don't get it. Paragon doesn't necessarily = smart or right. It's means justify the ends. Renegade is ends justify the means. Your quote is from Javik, who is very renegade. You're contradicting your own argument by quoting him. Committing an act that is alone evil (destroying a colony) to serve a greater good (slow the reapers down) is precisely what renegade is.

 

 

What if you were playing some sort of redemption story?

You could do that, of course. I'm guessing 99% of the people who pick ruthless play as renegade though.

[Monica21]

You just don't get it. Paragon doesn't necessarily = smart or right. It's means justify the ends. Renegade is ends justify the means. Your quote is from Javik, who is very renegade. You're contradicting your own argument by quoting him. Committing an act that is alone evil (destroying a colony) to serve a greater good (slow the reapers down) is precisely what renegade is.

 

You could do that, of course. I'm guessing 99% of the people who pick ruthless play as renegade though.

 

I quoted Javik because in this instance I agree with him. And I think since you're the one who brought up honor that it's relevant here. Because how much is Shepard's honor worth if he let Reapers invade? 

 

And I think you're the one who doesn't get it. The act itself is neither Paragon nor Renegade. You're preventing the Reapers from invading the galaxy. If you only look at it like that, then the decision is Paragon. You're getting hung up on the dead Batarians who are dead no matter what you choose.

[congokong]

I quoted Javik because in this instance I agree with him. And I think since you're the one who brought up honor that it's relevant here. Because how much is Shepard's honor worth if he let Reapers invade? 

 

And I think you're the one who doesn't get it. The act itself is neither Paragon nor Renegade. You're preventing the Reapers from invading the galaxy. If you only look at it like that, then the decision is Paragon. You're getting hung up on the dead Batarians who are dead no matter what you choose.

Clearly you don't understand the concept of paragon/renegade. There's nothing more to say.

[Monica21]

Clearly you don't understand the concept of paragon/renegade. There's nothing more to say.

 

I do understand the concept, but I think you're working from your own personal definition of Paragon and Renegade. As stated above, Paragon =/= Stupid. Which is what Shepard is if he doesn't destroy the relay. If your argument rests on my agreeing with your definition of Paragon, then you've made a poor argument. Make a better one.

[Natureguy85]

You just don't get it. Paragon doesn't necessarily = smart or right. It's means justify the ends. Renegade is ends justify the means. Your quote is from Javik, who is very renegade. You're contradicting your own argument by quoting him. Committing an act that is alone evil (destroying a colony) to serve a greater good (slow the reapers down) is precisely what renegade is.

 

Actually nobody knows what Paragon and Renegade are because they change. It was supposed to be Pargon is idealistic and Renegade is pragmatic. Paragon is not doing something bad or hurtful to others for some advantage to yourself. My change to the end of ME2, where researching the collector base would require more deaths is an example. Project Overlord is a great example. But sometimes it's that Paragon is nice while Renegade is a violent jerk.

This isn't the case for Arrival. You're not just giving yourself an advantage; you're preventing an immediate loss. If the Reapers arrive then, it's game over. I don't think it's right to call destroying the colony evil. There is no ill will or desire to kill. It's not a good thing, but it's something that must be done.

 

While it's an argument after the fact, and therefore should be taken with a grain of salt, saving the Collector base wasn't necessary to defeating the Reapers, but the destruction of the Alpha Relay was.

[cap and gown]

And I still disagree. "Stand amongst the ashes of a trillion dead souls and ask the ghosts if honor matters."

 

This is a side issue, unrelated to the topic at hand, buuut:

 

I think Javik's statement is ludicrous. Honor does matter. During Shepard's time those "trillion dead souls" would have been dead no matter what Javik had done, honorable or not. In the end, everyone living during Shepard's time will be dead regardless of what Shepard does, honorable or not. The ethics of honor is about who you are as a person and not about how you treat other people. I didn't get much into philosophy in school, but I believe the idea of an ethical code that focuses on who we are as an individual and who we want to be is called Socratic (maybe Platonic, Aristotelian?) ethics. Meanwhile, the ethics Javik proposes are basically utilitarian. This kind of ethics is not about who a person is as an individual, but in how much total happiness there is in society and how one's actions effect that total.

Not starting the project because you wish to preserve your honor would fit within the Socratic ethical framework, even though it would go against the utilitarian framework. In many ways, the Paragon choice is about following Socratic ethics, while the Renegade choice is about following utilitarian ethics.

 

OTOH, I would agree witth Natureguy that the Renegade/Paragon system is poorly thought out throughout the trilogy and that you instead get a mish mash of various different behaviors that don't clearly fall into an overall archetype.

[Monica21]

This is a side issue, unrelated to the topic at hand, buuut:

 

I think Javik's statement is ludicrous. Honor does matter. During Shepard's time those "trillion dead souls" would have been dead no matter what Javik had done, honorable or not. In the end, everyone living during Shepard's time will be dead regardless of what Shepard does, honorable or not. The ethics of honor is about who you are as a person and not about how you treat other people. I didn't get much into philosophy in school, but I believe the idea of an ethical code that focuses on who we are as an individual and who we want to be is called Socratic (maybe Platonic, Aristotelian?) ethics. Meanwhile, the ethics Javik proposes are basically utilitarian. This kind of ethics is not about who a person is as an individual, but in how much total happiness there is in society and how one's actions effect that total.

Not starting the project because you wish to preserve your honor would fit within the Socratic ethical framework, even though it would go against the utilitarian framework. In many ways, the Paragon choice is about following Socratic ethics, while the Renegade choice is about following utilitarian ethics.

 

OTOH, I would agree witth Natureguy that the Renegade/Paragon system is poorly thought out throughout the trilogy and that you instead get a mish mash of various different behaviors that don't clearly fall into an overall archetype.

 

I don't disagree that honor matters, but I also didn't bring up Shepard's honor. I included it because, in my view, Shepard's honor doesn't matter if he makes an active decision to not only release the Reapers on the galaxy, but to passively kill those Batarians by making a decision to not make a decision.

 

So, I'll ask again, where is the honor in not making a choice? And how is leaving the system without stopping the Reapers anything but cowardice?

[Natureguy85]

The ethics of honor is about who you are as a person and not about how you treat other people. I didn't get much into philosophy in school, but I believe the idea of an ethical code that focuses on who we are as an individual and who we want to be is called Socratic (maybe Platonic, Aristotelian?) ethics. Meanwhile, the ethics Javik proposes are basically utilitarian. This kind of ethics is not about who a person is as an individual, but in how much total happiness there is in society and how one's actions effect that total.

Not starting the project because you wish to preserve your honor would fit within the Socratic ethical framework, even though it would go against the utilitarian framework. In many ways, the Paragon choice is about following Socratic ethics, while the Renegade choice is about following utilitarian ethics.

 

How you treat other people says a lot about who you are as an individual. Utilitarianism says you can do harm if the result is more good. However, this raises questions, such as how the "value" of good or bad acts is determined. The personal code of honor focus begs the question of what is honorable and how that is determined. Monica is suggesting that it is dishonorable to allow the Reapers to arrive when you could have delayed them.

[congokong]

Actually nobody knows what Paragon and Renegade are because they change. It was supposed to be Pargon is idealistic and Renegade is pragmatic. Paragon is not doing something bad or hurtful to others for some advantage to yourself. My change to the end of ME2, where researching the collector base would require more deaths is an example. Project Overlord is a great example. But sometimes it's that Paragon is nice while Renegade is a violent jerk.
This isn't the case for Arrival. You're not just giving yourself an advantage; you're preventing an immediate loss. If the Reapers arrive then, it's game over. I don't think it's right to call destroying the colony evil. There is no ill will or desire to kill. It's not a good thing, but it's something that must be done.
 
While it's an argument after the fact, and therefore should be taken with a grain of salt, saving the Collector base wasn't necessary to defeating the Reapers, but the destruction of the Alpha Relay was.

The game shows what paragon/renegade are. Referring to choices, it is as I said with very few exceptions. The only one I can think of is turning over Tali's evidence strangely being renegade. Referring to dialogue, paragon is for nicer options while renegade is for aggressive ones. This discussion is obviously referring to choices.

Destroying a colony, when taken alone, is evil. Doing it for a greater good is when renegade/practicality factors in. Considering how much of an idealist Shepard can be, them having such conviction in killing 300,000 barbarians feels off. Not doing it being stupid is irrelevant. Frankly, I find some of the paragon options in the trilogy to be idiotic.

[cap and gown]

Wow. That's quite the coincidence. You addressed the points I brought up in this thread (Arrival, that conversation with Garrus in ME3). My canon also happens to be a colonist/ruthless Shepard. That backstory alone I feel is the best combination for not only being interesting, but giving motivations for why Shepard is the way they are. Ruthless also is the only service history which gives you a personality type. Basically, you'd never choose ruthless but play paragon. The same can't be said for sole survivor or war hero. Renegade also just feels the most realistic. People die, things go wrong, Shepard isn't the white knight here to save everyone, etc.

 

Perhaps it is not clear in that video, but this is NOT a renegade playthrough. None of my playthroughs are paragon or renegade. The point of my channel is move away from the paragon/renegade straight-jacket and RP characters based on background and world view, sometimes being paragon, sometimes renegade, but never because something is at the top or the dialogue wheel or at the bottom.

[Natureguy85]

The game shows what paragon/renegade are. Referring to choices, it is as I said with very few exceptions. The only one I can think of is turning over Tali's evidence strangely being renegade. Referring to dialogue, paragon is for nicer options while renegade is for aggressive ones. This discussion is obviously referring to choices.

Destroying a colony, when taken alone, is evil. Doing it for a greater good is when renegade/practicality factors in. Considering how much of an idealist Shepard can be, them having such conviction in killing 300,000 barbarians feels off. Not doing it being stupid is irrelevant. Frankly, I find some of the paragon options in the trilogy to be idiotic.

 

Actually the discussion is obviously referring to one specific choice and moved to talking about Paragon and Renegade generally. Dialogue is also a choice and characterizes Shepard too.The game isn't consistant. Yes, Renegade is more violent, but sometimes Paragon is. Fighting the Cerberus scientists making Throrian Creepers, being aggressive towards the Volus and C-Sec officer who are harassing the Quarian girl in ME2, punching Zaeed for blowing up the gas pipes, and pistol whipping Dr. Archer are all Paragon options. Apparently doing some dance moves with Garrus in ME3's Citadel DLC are Renegade options. Not destroying the Collector base is Renegade. Being pro-Cerberus is Renegade. The there's fun ones like with Elnora the Eclipse merc where Paragon is peacefully letting a murderer go but it's Renegade to shoot her when she pulls a gun.

 

There's nothing strange about turning over the evidence being renegade though. That is the most pragmatic response, which is what it was intended to be.   But sometimes it's being violent or just a jerk. Or being human-centric in the first game as opposed to being more open to working with aliens.

 

 

 

 

Perhaps it is not clear in that video, but this is NOT a renegade playthrough. None of my playthroughs are paragon or renegade. The point of my channel is move away from the paragon/renegade straight-jacket and RP characters based on background and world view, sometimes being paragon, sometimes renegade, but never because something is at the top or the dialogue wheel or at the bottom.

 

Yeah, I mentioned to someone recently that the problem with a system like this is that players will pick options based on, as you say, where the dialogue option is rather than analyze each choice and the options on their merits.

[Monica21]

Perhaps it is not clear in that video, but this is NOT a renegade playthrough. None of my playthroughs are paragon or renegade. The point of my channel is move away from the paragon/renegade straight-jacket and RP characters based on background and world view, sometimes being paragon, sometimes renegade, but never because something is at the top or the dialogue wheel or at the bottom.

This is much of what I'm trying to do with my current character. Basically, who is she and what presets did she have before getting the call, and how does she react in-game? A big one is how the people around her are affecting her outlook and world view. You've got an interesting playthrough going.

[congokong]

Perhaps it is not clear in that video, but this is NOT a renegade playthrough. None of my playthroughs are paragon or renegade. The point of my channel is move away from the paragon/renegade straight-jacket and RP characters based on background and world view, sometimes being paragon, sometimes renegade, but never because something is at the top or the dialogue wheel or at the bottom.

Anyone who plays auto-renegade isn't likely to have a fun role-playing experience. My Shepard is overall renegade, but that doesn't mean I just picked the bottom option only. The only renegade rule I had was to never use a paragon persuasion. The only time I was tempted to use it though was with Patriarch. As for the big choices, I just happened to feel she would choose the renegade one most of the time; excluding choosing Morinth, saving the breeder, and leaving David Archer to be tortured more.

[congokong]

This is a side issue, unrelated to the topic at hand, buuut:

 

I think Javik's statement is ludicrous. Honor does matter. During Shepard's time those "trillion dead souls" would have been dead no matter what Javik had done, honorable or not. In the end, everyone living during Shepard's time will be dead regardless of what Shepard does, honorable or not. The ethics of honor is about who you are as a person and not about how you treat other people. I didn't get much into philosophy in school, but I believe the idea of an ethical code that focuses on who we are as an individual and who we want to be is called Socratic (maybe Platonic, Aristotelian?) ethics. Meanwhile, the ethics Javik proposes are basically utilitarian. This kind of ethics is not about who a person is as an individual, but in how much total happiness there is in society and how one's actions effect that total.

Not starting the project because you wish to preserve your honor would fit within the Socratic ethical framework, even though it would go against the utilitarian framework. In many ways, the Paragon choice is about following Socratic ethics, while the Renegade choice is about following utilitarian ethics.

 

OTOH, I would agree witth Natureguy that the Renegade/Paragon system is poorly thought out throughout the trilogy and that you instead get a mish mash of various different behaviors that don't clearly fall into an overall archetype.

I think you misunderstand Javik's quote. He's saying if doing the honorable thing will end with everyone dead while doing otherwise would potentially save them, what does honor matter?

 

The paragon/renegade system isn't perfect, but regarding big choices, I feel it's pretty consistent.

[Sentinel2010]

Every argument here has been no longer relevant since the Citadel DLC.

How are those pull-ups paragon or renegade.

[congokong]

Every argument here has been no longer relevant since the Citadel DLC.

How are those pull-ups paragon or renegade.

They're not. They're just the method of taking an action in the cut-scene. You don't earn any points by using them.

[KaiserShep]

They're not. They're just the method of taking an action in the cut-scene. You don't earn any points by using them.

I guess it's kind of weird though because it's technically no different from simply pressing any other button mapped, like the universal space bar.

[JPVNG]

I do understand the concept, but I think you're working from your own personal definition of Paragon and Renegade. As stated above, Paragon =/= Stupid. Which is what Shepard is if he doesn't destroy the relay. If your argument rests on my agreeing with your definition of Paragon, then you've made a poor argument. Make a better one.

for some it seems a pure paragon its like, i don t know, an angel ?

[Monica21]

for some it seems a pure paragon its like, i don t know, an angel ?

Like, a Precious Moments angel? Because Biblical angels were really mean.

[JPVNG]

Exactly 

Do not tell that to my Mum please (about the biblical angels lol), i never let her see Supernatural.