111 réponses à ce sujet

[swirlwind]

My biggest issue with the current system in ME2 is that it makes it very unrewarding to play certain types of Shepards I had no trouble playing in ME1. For example, a Colonist Shepard who is otherwise very Paragon, but who absolutely hates batarians because of her background. Or a moral Shepard who struggles with her temper. Or an Earthborn Shepard who is trying to overcome her gang background but who also believes that in order to deal with organised crime, extremely Renegade measures are called for. While I can still play these characters at least to a certain extent, I also have to come to terms with the fact that I may not be able to pull off all the persuades/intimidates they require, and that's disappointing.

[Tennyochan]

i like the current ME2 system over the Charm/Intimidate skill.

Although sometimes i would like both renegade/paragon options available for those grey areas despite playing mainly on one side of meter(?).



Perhaps offering both except during those big decisions where you'll have the Par/Reg option depending on your level?

[Tooneyman]

tennyochan wrote...

i like the current ME2 system over the Charm/Intimidate skill.
Although sometimes i would like both renegade/paragon options available for those grey areas despite playing mainly on one side of meter(?).

Perhaps offering both except during those big decisions where you'll have the Par/Reg option depending on your level?

Agreed, have the ability to be a renagon or a paragade is always much funner.

[Lunatic LK47]

Collider wrote...

ME2's system is terrible. You can 100% paragon or renegade and still not be able to use charm or intimidate. That's incredibly flawed.

Do those moments happen with the Tali/Legion and Miranda/Jack conflict scenes? I'm asking because I haven't gotten that far yet.

[Collider]

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

Collider wrote...

ME2's system is terrible. You can 100% paragon or renegade and still not be able to use charm or intimidate. That's incredibly flawed.

Do those moments happen with the Tali/Legion and Miranda/Jack conflict scenes? I'm asking because I haven't gotten that far yet.

Yes. Best chance is to do Miranda and Jack's loyalty missions as soon as possible, if you wait long enough you can't do charm or intimidate enough with 100% paragon or renegade. Before the IFF, make sure to have done Tali's loyalty mission. After the IFF, do Legion's loyalty as soon as possible.

[Lunatic LK47]

Collider wrote...

Lunatic LK47 wrote...

Collider wrote...

ME2's system is terrible. You can 100% paragon or renegade and still not be able to use charm or intimidate. That's incredibly flawed.

Do those moments happen with the Tali/Legion and Miranda/Jack conflict scenes? I'm asking because I haven't gotten that far yet.

Yes. Best chance is to do Miranda and Jack's loyalty missions as soon as possible, if you wait long enough you can't do charm or intimidate enough with 100% paragon or renegade. Before the IFF, make sure to have done Tali's loyalty mission. After the IFF, do Legion's loyalty as soon as possible.

Ah, okay, thanks for the heads-up. Good thing I'm only focusing on transfering my ME1 characters right now. Just waiting until I have all of the DLC before I finish ME2.

Modifié par Lunatic LK47, 20 mai 2010 - 04:34 .

[Nivenus]

onelifecrisis wrote...

I think the current system works fairly well. Shepard needs the courage of his convictions. A man (or woman) who is torn between deontological and consequentialist viewpoints will not be able argue with real conviction from either standpoint. Not that there is really such a thing as a deontological Shepard, what with all the needless killing that he/she likes to do, but still, one can try.

That assumes that a paragade or renegon (or just plain neutral) Shepard is morally conflicted. It's perfectly possible that they're not and that they simply fall a different moral compass than the one the game provides.

[Bigdoser]

Paragade and renegon don't exist it's just something the community made up your either a paragon or a renegade this is just my opinion, oh yes I prefer me2 system.

[Andrew_Waltfeld]

Bigdoser wrote...

Paragade and renegon don't exist it's just something the community made up your either a paragon or a renegade this is just my opinion, oh yes I prefer me2 system.

community made up, and it's been bascially adopted, it's equivlant to saying "I give candy to children and then I beat the crap out of their bullies who try to take it away."

Or

"I take the bullies candy away and give it other nicer children."

Moral compass the community has made works (it's called 50/50 on the meter), dissapointing that I have to cheat in the save file to play how I want. I just do like 1000 renegrade and paragon points in the save file so I have no need to worry about renegrade or paragon points, I can do whatever and shape my sheppard as I see fit.

Modifié par Andrew_Waltfeld, 20 mai 2010 - 09:59 .

[onelifecrisis]

Nivenus wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

I think the current system works fairly well. Shepard needs the courage of his convictions. A man (or woman) who is torn between deontological and consequentialist viewpoints will not be able argue with real conviction from either standpoint. Not that there is really such a thing as a deontological Shepard, what with all the needless killing that he/she likes to do, but still, one can try.

That assumes that a paragade or renegon (or just plain neutral) Shepard is morally conflicted. It's perfectly possible that they're not and that they simply fall a different moral compass than the one the game provides.

IMO...

Firstly, you can't really play a neutral Shepard. The game rarely gives "neutral" options, except in ordinary conversations. So to end up with even(ish) paragon and renegade points you have to alternate between two highly contrasting ethical theories. You can't just sit on the fence.

I find it hard to image that a Shepard who alternates between paragon and renegade choices is not morally conflicted, unless their "moral compass" is defined by arbitrary rules (e.g. all batarians are bad) rather than reasoning. People who's moral compasses are arbitrarily defined tend not to have the courage of their convictions because counter examples (e.g. a good batarian) will be too easy to find, and after a certain age they'll have had too many of those counter-examples to feel sure of themselves.

[Andrew_Waltfeld]

onelifecrisis wrote...

Nivenus wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

I think the current system works fairly well. Shepard needs the courage of his convictions. A man (or woman) who is torn between deontological and consequentialist viewpoints will not be able argue with real conviction from either standpoint. Not that there is really such a thing as a deontological Shepard, what with all the needless killing that he/she likes to do, but still, one can try.

That assumes that a paragade or renegon (or just plain neutral) Shepard is morally conflicted. It's perfectly possible that they're not and that they simply fall a different moral compass than the one the game provides.

IMO...

Firstly, you can't really play a neutral Shepard. The game rarely gives "neutral" options, except in ordinary conversations. So to end up with even(ish) paragon and renegade points you have to alternate between two highly contrasting ethical theories. You can't just sit on the fence.

I find it hard to image that a Shepard who alternates between paragon and renegade choices is not morally conflicted, unless their "moral compass" is defined by arbitrary rules (e.g. all batarians are bad) rather than reasoning. People who's moral compasses are arbitrarily defined tend not to have the courage of their convictions because counter examples (e.g. a good batarian) will be too easy to find, and after a certain age they'll have had too many of those counter-examples to feel sure of themselves.

and Artbitrary rules can't exist? why? Reasoning as to why you hate Batarians could be considered the colonist. It's not illogical and most of the time, I end up going 55/45 on the renegrade and paragon scale in ME1. ME2, it's daratistically harder to do so, so I don't bother and do the decisions that I feel should be done, typically I end up with 55/45, then again, I was unable to do any of the renegrade/paragon choices sometimes, nor did I feel morally conflcited with my choices cause I made them.

Modifié par Andrew_Waltfeld, 21 mai 2010 - 02:35 .

[Dean_the_Young]

He never said arbitrary rules don't exist. Second, hating Batarians because of past experiences wouldn't be arbitrary. (It would, however, still be wrong, for the same reasons he mentioned: the ease of counter-examples.)



His point about arbitrary rules of morality is that few people who accept their morality defined for them by others rarely truly believe it when challenged about them: contradictions and fallacies within them undermine the logic when exposed. It isn't until people have the experience to test their beliefs and adapt them that they can claim the courage of their convictions.







All that being said, I feel more people should also think of Paragon/Renegade in terms of being external reputation as well. The reason Renegons can't be Renegades is that they don't have the balls (or the reputation for the balls) to be taken as seriously.



The common people might be intimidated easily, but two party members who have seen you give candy to babies and know you really wouldn't shove them out an airlock? Why should they be cowed by you?