103 réponses à ce sujet

[Fredgtrer]

QQ

[Keithhy]

As a metagaming Paragon, you know that no 'good' decision will carry seriously negative effects. In ME3, I actually want to be betrayed, have team members permenantly killed, and be royally screwed over for doing the right thing, if the right thing is a foolish decision. For instance, the awakenings Grunt and Legion were supposed to be risks, but you knew that everything would be ok. If something like that resulted in a permenantly negative decision, it would add depth to the game. You would no longer be able to play a Paladin, you would have to make intelligent choices that reflected on your principles.

On the flip side, Renegade decisions should lead to some form of accountability, even if only being banned from certain shops or being prohibited from a Ward in the Citadel by C-Sec. Accountability and true risk would add a lot to the game, meaning that a player could no longer just blindly play the game as a generic good or bad guy. These additions to ME3 would require thinking and understanding. Please, please Bioware, screw Paragons over for being naively nice, and screw Renegades over for being utter jerks. "Nuff said.

[Sharn01]

I will say though that I do agree that repurcussions are needed for both paragon, but also renegade.  They both offer substantial reward's but niether offers much in the way of backfiring on you.

For instance your excuse to give the station to Cerberus. ME quest's where just the tip of the iceberg for Cerberus's deeds if you look up some of what they are responsible for.

Tim has already killed million's of human's and alien's in the past for the sake of his project's, what to keep him from wiping out colonies himself to continue experiment's on the station, and unlike your post, that is not made up number's but ME fact.

If at any point in the game you thought you could actually trust TIM, not the corporate drones on your ship with no clue what the company actually does, you are a complete and utter fool.

Modifié par Sharn01, 04 février 2010 - 10:56 .

[Gocad]

I agree. Bioware seems to have a strange idea of what it means to be a renegade. I tried last night playing a die hard renegade by picking renegade dialogue options no matter what....the result made me cringe....Shepard acted like an idiot without a clue.

I know it's easier said than done, but paragon options should cost now and then, and renegade choices should also have benefits. Most of the time that's not the case in ME2. 

Modifié par Gocad, 04 février 2010 - 11:13 .

[manyfistss]

I play mostly Renegade but with some Paragon choices, like I try to be nice to my crew but will chew them out if they start to **** and whine. I killed the Rachni because they were a pain in the ass to deal with. I killed Shiala because she followed Saren/Sovereign in till he betrayed her, and she was part of the Thorian, mainly because her clone was a pain in the ass to deal with. I reprogrammed the Heretics because their memories could be useful, I saved the Council mainly because I had too much fun jerking them around. I chewed out the Admirals of the Flotilla, which will lead to political unrest but I encouraged them to go to war, because they dared question my sweet Tali. Kept the Collector's Base because it has great advancement in all areas of science, and a potential weapon to use against the Reapers and or a possible hideout for humanity should the worse come to end. Take a few million humans and hide them in the collector's base while Reapers go on reaping. Come out after awhile, and colonize the galaxy again.

[Jim_uk]

DarthCaine wrote...

BioWare should take cues from The Witcher

Exactly, no right or wrong, just shades of grey.

[Caprasia]

I tend to play it how I see it, in some situations that means a paragon response, in others renegade. Usually that means I end up with more paragon than renegade points but for me it's often situational, or even down to who I'm dealing with.



Someone acting reasonably will be more likely to get a reasonable response, someone acting a jerk will be treated like one.



Also... the paragon route results in no Zaeed loyalty? Really? Not for me, he ended up loyal on my first run through despite his nemesis getting away.



No one can say how choices you've made will affect ME3, save BioWare, but I suspect some may be surprised, I hope so anyway. As I recall Jack saying on one occasion: "Too nice, that one will come back to bite you on the ass some day"

[Bann Duncan]

Maria Caliban wrote...

Taritu wrote...

Should be negatives from certain Renegade decisions too, as far as that goes. They aren't big on consequences overall.

Seriously. I love it how people call for negative consequences to paragon actions, but freak out if you suggest that the anti-social, genocidal bullying that Renegade Sheps enjoy might have any negatives.

If you want realistic consequences then ask for them for BOTH ethincal paths.

Ditto. I don't think it's nonsensical to think that pissing fewer groups off can translate to more allies in the war against the Reapers.

[Bann Duncan]

Jim_uk wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

BioWare should take cues from The Witcher

Exactly, no right or wrong, just shades of grey.

Um have you played DA: O?

[fogofeternity]

Gocad wrote...

I agree. Bioware seems to have a strange idea of what it means to be a renegade. I tried last night playing a die hard renegade by picking renegade dialogue options no matter what....the result made me cringe....Shepard acted like an idiot without a clue.

I think they're far better at effective "evil" options in their games than they used to be. I think ME has been much better in stating paragon/renegade choices in shades of gray.

Though that's massively undermined by the fact that you know where paragon and renegade choices are on the dialogue wheel. Thankfully I tend to forget that during the game; I don't play strongly paragon or renegade, but I chose to destroy the Geth rather than reprogram because I was with Samara and her argument that brainwashing was wrong seemed strong. So effectively I thought I was doing the right thing; except apparently its reprogramming that's the paragon option.

That was a tough choice to make, and I'm glad I forgot about paragon/renegade on the dialogue wheel. It wouldn't have felt like such a genuine moral dilemma if I'd remembered that option x was paragon and option y was renegade.

In some ways I think the whole thing would be better (certainly from a roleplay perspective) if they just took out any overt indication of paragon and renegade. Don't say that paragon choices are at the top of the wheel or that renegade choices are at the bottom. Keep a *background* record of paragon/renegade, from which additional dialogue options (what exist now as red or blue) are provided as necessary.

Then just keep paragon/renegade interrupts.

In some senses this would be great to have as an optional aspect of the game (and presumably wouldn't be massively difficult to implement).

[Cajeb]

I'm heavily Renegade but a lot of the time the Paragon Choice feels like the Renegade choice for me. All my choices are to stop the Reapers in the end.



I didn't save the Council because Sovereign is priority.

I didn't kill the Rachni because I need troops

I didn't destroy the genophage cure because I need troops

I reprogrammed the geth even thought it was morally reprehensible because I need intel and troops

I saved the base because I need intel and tech

[Sniper11709]

The Alliance losing only 8 ships actully sort of proves the point some people are trying to make about paragons getting no negatives, rather then being in a weakened position for ME2 in the end they only take minimal casualties when it makes out like your going to take heavy losses. Even better it goes against other information you get in game that says they are still rebuilding from their losses, if it take 2 years to rebuild ships other then dreadnoughts then the galaxy is doomed.

Now i think that, yes paragon players should have negatives for doing things like saving the council, giving up the base and other things like that. At the same time Renegades should be punished for being complete jerks choices but not punished more then we gain for our "whatever it takes" option.

Also seeing as someone mentioned the Destiny Ascension being a bonus i need to take one of my posts from another thread so it may be a bit off topic.


By the way that Biggest Dreadnaught In Space your so proud of got it's ass kicked by a fleet consisting of just one
reaper and some geth so i'm not very confident that it will be any use at all in an actual fight against the reapers, oh and rather then utilizing it in the fight against the geth they have been sending it around on a 20 colony victory cruise . Also that dreadnaught was diverted from the battle for the citadel to pick up the council, the council diverted their biggest dreadnaught to pick them up rather then letting them fight. Hell even if it still around during the actual war i expect to just hang around to defend the citadel along with the majority of the council fleets.

Modifié par Sniper11709, 04 février 2010 - 12:23 .

[fogofeternity]

Sniper11709 wrote...
By the way that Biggest Dreadnought In Space your so proud of got it's ass kicked by a fleet consisting of just one reaper and some geth so i'm not very confident that it will be any use at all in an actual fight against the reapers, oh and rather then utilizing it in the fight against the geth they have been sending it around on a 20 colony victory cruise . Also that dreadnought was diverted from the battle for the citadel to pick up the council, the council diverted their biggest dreadnought to pick them up rather then letting them fight. Hell even if it still around during the actual war i expect to just hang around to defend the citadel along with the majority of the council fleets.

Yeah, I always feel fine about my decision to abandon the Council.

The most powerful Citadel civilization warship around, and its only job is to evacuate the Council from the Citadel and then haul ass? No sympathy at all for the Council, whether paragon or renegade.

[Jigero]

Uh whats this talk of Zaeed not being loyal if you paragon his loyalty mission? I saved all the slaves and let the guy get away and I still got him to be loyal. He gets trapped under a pillar at the end and started to burn, I told him we need to work together. You can even punch him in the face with a paragon interrupt to get him to listen to you.

[Jim_uk]

Bann Duncan wrote...

Jim_uk wrote...

DarthCaine wrote...

BioWare should take cues from The Witcher

Exactly, no right or wrong, just shades of grey.

Um have you played DA: O?

Yes, what's that go to do with anything?

[Kuari999]

FYI, saving the citadel, the humans only lost 8 cruisers, about 300 in each and it saved not only the council, but the most powerful ship in Council space. AND about 10k people... as for the base, even the Reaper IFF backfired, not to mention Harbinger's control unit would still be intact, and who knows what indoctrination tech is there.  Pure and simple, its been established that Reaper tech is VERY dangerous to mess with, over and over.

I get what the OP is saying, the examples just sucked horribly for Mass Effect. I certainly understand the Dragon Age example though.

Modifié par Kuari999, 04 février 2010 - 12:25 .

[Vicious]

Dragon Age failed pretty hard in many places for being a game billed as making 'hard choices.' and 'dark fantasy.' The problem is balancing 'dark' with 'heroic.' and Bioware's games, ME included, are at their core heroic fantasies. You are the hero one way or another.

[Sniper11709]

Kuari999 wrote...

FYI, saving the citadel, the humans only lost 8 cruisers, about 300 in each and it saved not only the council, but the most powerful ship in Council space. AND about 10k people... as for the base, even the Reaper IFF backfired, not to mention Harbinger's control unit would still be intact, and who knows what indoctrination tech is there.  Pure and simple, its been established that Reaper tech is VERY dangerous to mess with, over and over.

I get what the OP is saying, the examples just sucked horribly for Mass Effect. I certainly understand the Dragon Age example though.

Look at my post a few above yours to read my opinion about the end of ME1 and the losses the Alliance took.
Yes Reaper tech is dangerous but guess what, so were nuclear weapons and people researched them anyway.

The Reapers are basically like the Geth (at least that's what legion tells us) in that they have hundreds of AIs in them so of course the Reaper IFF backfired, it probably had an AI in it. But what you are forgetting is that when EDI was unshackled she was able to beat the IFF and resume control.

As far as i can tell Harbinger can only take control of people who have implants like Saren or the Collectors, maybe that's part of the Retribution Novel.

Modifié par Sniper11709, 04 février 2010 - 12:41 .

[Fishy]

Renegade it's not evil or whatever..it's just playing has an ANTI-HERO . While the Paragon seem to be the idealistic moron who probably beleive in Angel still.

[Kuari999]

Sniper11709 wrote...
Look at my post a few above yours to read my opinion about the end of ME1 and the losses the Alliance took.
Yes Reaper tech is dangerous but guess what, so were nuclear weapons and people researched them anyway.

The Reapers are basically like the Geth (at least that's what legion tells us) in that they have hundreds of AIs in them so of course the Reaper IFF backfired, it probably had an AI in it. But what you are forgetting is that when EDI was unshackled she was able to beat the IFF and resume control.

As far as i can tell Harbinger can only take control of people who have implants like Saren or the Collectors, maybe that's part of the Retribution Novel.

Cruisers are decently sized and expensive, especially the Element Zero if I remember right.  That's the biggest issue, especially with the budget that had recently gone towards the Normandy.  Also humans are still relatively new to space, they don't have shipyards spread out all over.  The Destiny Ascension was simply getting overwhelmed though and probably wasn't well built for taking on small ships.  Don't know the details on that though.

The Geth aren't true AIs though, btw, just the VI processes got to the point of putting them borderline, its all the neural network.  I'm not forgetting EDI beat the thing, but there's more to it than that.  Harbinger could potentially take control of the station again, the indoctrination could be present in that station, which was even hinted at in the first game on side missions where people had become husks for no explained reason, though logs said people acted strangely.  It isn't only about the tech itself, its the fact anyone near the tech for extended periods becomes a danger.

[Loregothe]

Let me get this straight..



You are surprised because choosing negative things brings more negative results than choosing positive things?



That makes me lolz..

[Gocad]

Paragon vs renegade choices should be more like the one you get at the end of the missile base side mission.

[Sniper11709]

Kuari999 wrote...

Sniper11709 wrote...
Look at my post a few above yours to read my opinion about the end of ME1 and the losses the Alliance took.
Yes Reaper tech is dangerous but guess what, so were nuclear weapons and people researched them anyway.

The Reapers are basically like the Geth (at least that's what legion tells us) in that they have hundreds of AIs in them so of course the Reaper IFF backfired, it probably had an AI in it. But what you are forgetting is that when EDI was unshackled she was able to beat the IFF and resume control.

As far as i can tell Harbinger can only take control of people who have implants like Saren or the Collectors, maybe that's part of the Retribution Novel.

Cruisers are decently sized and expensive, especially the Element Zero if I remember right.  That's the biggest issue, especially with the budget that had recently gone towards the Normandy.  Also humans are still relatively new to space, they don't have shipyards spread out all over.  The Destiny Ascension was simply getting overwhelmed though and probably wasn't well built for taking on small ships.  Don't know the details on that though.

The Geth aren't true AIs though, btw, just the VI processes got to the point of putting them borderline, its all the neural network.  I'm not forgetting EDI beat the thing, but there's more to it than that.  Harbinger could potentially take control of the station again, the indoctrination could be present in that station, which was even hinted at in the first game on side missions where people had become husks for no explained reason, though logs said people acted strangely.  It isn't only about the tech itself, its the fact anyone near the tech for extended periods becomes a danger.

Well i can't really argue about the ships really because we are never told their shipyard capacity, also there would be alot of damaged ships needing repairs after the battle so that would take time as well. The normandy cost the same as a Heavy Cruiser.

I'm confused with your comments on the Geth. It dosen't matter if the Geth are true AI or not, in the Mass Effect universe that is actully considered an AI by the way, at least if i read the first novel correctly becuase the Alliance gets in trouble for creating a neurel network just like that. The Reapers are in fact AIs so the fact that geth aren't dosen't really affect what i posted. The fact that EDI could beat it means that if they installed a few non shackled AIs they shouldn't have to worry about any tech based traps, only problem with that idea is what happens if a AI got Indoctrinated.

We'll have to agree to disagree (at least till ME3) about Harbinger.

I'm not so sure about the Indoctranation not being part of the station so you may be right about that. If the the station is capable of building a reaper then it must also be capable of producing the Indoctrination systems. At the same time it also means the station can build all the reapers advanced tech so either A) the station can't indoctrinate and thus is nowhere near the treasure trove we would like or it can Indoctrinate, which means that it has all the reaper tech we could want.

Actully the very fact that the station may be able to Indoctrinate is a good thing, the Galactic races need to learn to counter Indoctrination otherwise their efforts to resist are going to be seriously blocked. So if that's the only thing we learn from the base i would consider it worth it.

Modifié par Sniper11709, 04 février 2010 - 01:19 .

[Sniper11709]

Loregothe wrote...

Let me get this straight..

You are surprised because choosing negative things brings more negative results than choosing positive things?

That makes me lolz..

You really need to stop confusing Renegade and Negative.

Renegade is "Whatever It Takes" so we should be getting bonuses in the war effort but have more trouble in other matters.
Paragon is "Ends Don't Justify The Means" so they should get negatives in the war effor but bonuses elsewhere.

Modifié par Sniper11709, 04 février 2010 - 01:26 .

[Sniper11709]

Gocad wrote...

Paragon vs renegade choices should be more like the one you get at the end of the missile base side mission.

Ok this mission keeps getting refrenced so could someone tell me where to find it.