131 réponses à ce sujet

[iamdoingthat]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...
Hmm, I viewed the final choice for ME2 rather differently. I remember how Sovereign was saying that the Reapers strive to force organic species down certain technological paths, to prevent the possibility of them discovering new technology. I felt like by keeping the base, we were once again just repeating the incident with the Mass Relays. Even if we beat the Reapers, I also don't really trust TIM with that thing. He rubs me the wrong way. =p

I thought this was the best reason to destroy the base.  Even if there isn't any indoctrination risk (although I suspect there would be), using the Collector base would just be further playing into the Reapers' hands/tentacles.

Legion says the same thing about the Geth.  They want to build their own future, not rely on something else to give it to them.

[Spiv007]

I vote for the " stuff the fate of humanity and go spend your credits at omega option "

[mcsupersport]

Ahglock wrote...


I don't really disagree with the ME2 points so i took them out.

1) 10,000 person crew dreadnought might just come in handy later.

Sure if you also take out the reaper.  Later means jack and **** if the reaper succeeds and summons his pals.

2) Didn't want to leave a cloud of Geth ships behind me while trying to
defead an unknown dreadnought.

Good
tactics to win a battle, not the strategy i'd use to win the war. 
storming the beaches of Normandy sucked and people got chewed to hell. 
the tactics of the battle sucked and basically were if we zerg rush
them enough eventually we will get through.  it was a needed strategy
to win the war.  So in the fight against the reaper was your goal to
survive the fight with the least casualites or to stop the reaper.  I
think the overarching goal was to stop the reaper and your strategy has
to focus on that.


3) Help the leaders get out alive, but that was less important than
first 2.
you can always elect new leaders, these guys were not exactly showing huge ammounts of competence.  i was irritated that you could not choose to try and have a new council that was balanced with even more races than the original, bring in the vlous etc.  but fit he council dies, its human dominated no matter what you only choose udina or anderson. 

In no way am i saying your reaosning is wrong, everyone loooks at things with a different persoective.  i'm just showing another one.

2) Didn't want to leave a cloud of Geth ships behind me while trying to
defead an unknown dreadnought.

Good
tactics to win a battle, not the strategy i'd use to win the war. 
storming the beaches of Normandy sucked and people got chewed to hell. 
the tactics of the battle sucked and basically were if we zerg rush
them enough eventually we will get through.  it was a needed strategy
to win the war.  So in the fight against the reaper was your goal to
survive the fight with the least casualites or to stop the reaper.  I
think the overarching goal was to stop the reaper and your strategy has
to focus on that.

Yet it is even worse tactics to run by an enemy to attack a strong target and leave an enemy force just behind you to get you in a pincer movement.  Why shouldn't the Geth finish off the Destiny and then slam your fleet in the A@@ while you are trying to kill Sovereign??  They have you trapped between a Dreadnought, in a closed space, and an incoming fleet.  This is NOT where I would want to have my fleet be, if I was hoping to destroy a large ship.  Now if I knew they would stall around and maybe take off after killing the Destiny then maybe I would be more apt to let it die, but to lose the Destiny and then have the Geth hit my flank or rear is a receipe for a slaughter.


1) 10,000 person crew dreadnought might just come in handy later.

Sure if you also take out the reaper.  Later means jack and **** if the reaper succeeds and summons his pals.

I was also hoping that the Destiny would get clear and then maybe turn the main gun on Soverign,  later didn't have to mean next month/year, but just later in the battle when it could get a clean shot without hordes of Geth attacking it. 


By the way why isn't the Asari on the Council a Matriarch??  She looks more like a Matron, WAAAYYY too young to be in her position of power, and outside the lifecycle context of Asari.

Modifié par mcsupersport, 23 mars 2010 - 07:25 .

[Ahglock]

LPPrince wrote...

"One extra disk" means Bioware spends way more money than they need to.

Maybe i am old, but one extra disk does not mean much to me.  I've played games with 22 disks.  As graphics improve and DVds no longer hold games as well as they used to(at least this generations games), we will see more 2 disk games.  And if that is what it takes to make the game better bioware etc. should be doing it.

[RazielStar]

I have both a Paragade and a Renegon, because I like variety and balance, but I made damn sure I focused on Sovergin in ME1. No political manuvering and I could care less about sacrificing people to save political idiots. The main threat and consequenses were very short term and a hard choice needed to be made.



ME2 on the other had is really more long term and judging the true worth of the base. Personally I blew the hell out of it without a second thought. Not because horrible things were done there and not because you can't trust TIM. Obviously he'll try to make a power play but nothing he does will matter if the reapers come. I blew the base because you can't trust Reaper tech. Every bit of the stuff seems hardwired to destroy you no matter how small. *A 37 million yr old IFF and it still called the damn collectors.* Not to mention the whole subtext of our dependence on their tech makes me feel like we should go in a different direction.

[rayremy]

I blew up the base to see a big explosion. Let the council die so I could watch there ship blow up.



Explosions are pretty.

[Arahlene]

sergio71785 wrote...

Yeah well, guess who's got an army of Geth, Rachni, and Krogan?  

I'd be careful with assuming too much. You don't know they'll actually end up on your side and remember they've been trouble before. Just saying.

[Ahglock]

mcsupersport wrote...





2) Didn't want to leave a cloud of Geth ships behind me while trying to
defead an unknown dreadnought.


Yet it is even worse tactics to run by an enemy to attack a strong target and leave an enemy force just behind you to get you in a pincer movement.  Why shouldn't the Geth finish off the Destiny and then slam your fleet in the A@@ while you are trying to kill Sovereign??  They have you trapped between a Dreadnought, in a closed space, and an incoming fleet.  This is NOT where I would want to have my fleet be, if I was hoping to destroy a large ship.  Now if I knew they would stall around and maybe take off after killing the Destiny then maybe I would be more apt to let it die, but to lose the Destiny and then have the Geth hit my flank or rear is a receipe for a slaughter.

And if you weren't on a timer you might have a point.  but you were on a timer and you needed to kill the reaper before he summoned more of his friends.  protecting the ship and getting in position so the geth don't flank you takes way too much time.  And yes it is a recipe for slaughter, but sometimes you need to get slaughtered in order to win the war. 

mcsupersport wrote...
1) 10,000 person crew dreadnought might just come in handy later.

Sure if you also take out the reaper.  Later means jack and **** if the reaper succeeds and summons his pals.

I was also hoping that the Destiny would get clear and then maybe turn the main gun on Soverign,  later didn't have to mean next month/year, but just later in the battle when it could get a clean shot without hordes of Geth attacking it. 

Why would you think they would do that, there goal was to porkchop sandwhich(swearing and stuff in the link) out of there.  Tthey wanted to run away to protect the council, not get engaged in a fight.  If they had said, we need to clear the area so we can open up our main guns on the reaper.  i'd be like awesome.  But instead they werp rotect us man the council is on board.  . 

mcsupersport wrote...
By the way why isn't the Asari on the Council a Matriarch??  She looks more like a Matron, WAAAYYY too young to be in her position of power, and outside the lifecycle context of Asari.

I had not noticed that.  Maybe because she is hotter this way.

[LPPrince]

Ahglock wrote...

LPPrince wrote...

"One extra disk" means Bioware spends way more money than they need to.

Maybe i am old, but one extra disk does not mean much to me.  I've played games with 22 disks.  As graphics improve and DVds no longer hold games as well as they used to(at least this generations games), we will see more 2 disk games.  And if that is what it takes to make the game better bioware etc. should be doing it.

It costs more to produce games that have more than one disk.

I'm saying Mass Effect was good enough that it didn't need to be on two disks.

ME2 raised the bar. I'm hoping ME3 is also on more than one disk, but I know and understand why Bioware would like to keep it to just one.

[LPPrince]

I haven't watched the Porkchop Sandwich video in forever.



Thank you for reminding me how lulzworthy it is.

[primero holodon]

Well the ME1 endining is justifiable in the fact that the Alliance escorts Asencion before the citadel was opened enough to get ships through so it's not like the alliance was taking their time to get to sovreign it was that they couldn't get to sovreign at the time

[mcsupersport]

Ahglock wrote...



And if you weren't on a timer you might have a point.  but you were on a timer and you needed to kill the reaper before he summoned more of his friends.  protecting the ship and getting in position so the geth don't flank you takes way too much time.  And yes it is a recipe for slaughter, but sometimes you need to get slaughtered in order to win the war. 

But the timer isn't the same for both runs.  The idea is go in early or wait until the Citidel opens, not go in and divert or go directly to the Citidel.  In the Paragon run, you bring in the fleet early to destroy the Geth and free the Destiny.  In the neutral and Renegade you hold off until the Citidel starts opening and then make a mad dash to to Soverign.   In my opinion, the time it takes to wait, allows the Geth to finish off the Destiny and would also allow plenty of time especially during the battle to close and engage you during your fight with the Dreadnought.  They didn't do this for the same reason they didn't make it possible to lose too many ships to be able to defeat Soverign if you came in early, game play.  But to allow a force to destroy a Capital ship and Leadership of the settled universe, while leaving them behind you in a rear attack position is foolish in most tactical terms.  Now they(Geth and Citidel fleet) didn't use sound tactics, so hey, maybe it would really work, but in my opinion, to leave that force unculled back there with plenty of time to get to the Citidel is to invite destruction and defeat.

[Sturmwulfe]

In Mass Effect, letting the Council die is also letting 10,000 other aliens die. Humanity wants to rise up and have a seat on the Council, so the human sacrifice and proof of military might against Sovereign was what it took to prove that. This was my choice since I believe a unified Galaxy will be stronger in the long run. Humanity alone can't deal with the Reapers, in my mind.



In Mass Effect 2, I chose to destroy the base. TIM really didn't do his sales pitch that well. Sending Shepard and the crew off blind and putting their lives at risk without them knowing what was really going on (Collector Ship was a big turning point for me in trusting his judgment), and suggesting Shepard sacrifice the Normandy's crew to take more time preparing for the mission as well as not really seeming to care that his science team on the derelict Reaper all perished really set the tone for his intentions. If he were really interested in putting humanity first, you think he'd show more compassion for the people working for his cause.



Legion also put it best, to paraphrase what he said, the Reapers want species to develop along the lines the Reapers set out because they want emerging species to use their technology to make them predictable. Intact Reaper technology tends to have a habit of doing terrible things to the people who think they're using it. The Collector base is Reaper technology.



The only real technological innovations I noticed the Collectors have were;

-A Mass Effect field near the core of the universe, where nothing should be able to exist

-The ability to freely pass through the Omega 4 relay

-Strong beam weapons

-Temporary paralyzing toxins (I assume) in the Seeker swarms

-Crudely meshing human anatomy with weapons (Scion, Praetorian)

-The ability to construct a Reaper using genetic material

-The ability to convert bodies into genetic pulp



I really saw nothing the Collectors had that would really be all that beneficial enough to keep something like that around. If the Collectors had anything that could be used as a weapon, it reasons they would have used it to try and stop Shepard's team in their many encounters, especially when they were on the base. Almost anything powerful they had, beam weapons excepted, came from processing humans. That means we'd have to sacrifice more people for things that we don't even know what they'll do against a Reaper. The beam weapons, while powerful, are matched or even surpassed by technology we already possess. The Collectors also didn't have any shielding technology, it seemed like.



So I don't think it's a great idea to leave something where the only technology we've seen involve sacrificing people to create it to a ruthless terrorist who gladly sacrifices his own people to make ends meet. I can easily see TIM using Cerberus as a new form of Collectors to gather aliens to make weapons that we have no idea will be any good against the Reapers, especially since they know what technology that base possesses.



I'd rather work on having a united galaxy for when the Reapers come where all races are working together with various skills, talents, and technology. It seems like a better gambit than the abomination known as the Collector base run by Cerberus. At least there's unpredictability on the side of united races.

[C4Clan]

mcsupersport wrote...

ME1, three reasons to save the Destiny Ascention-
1) 10,000 person crew dreadnought might just come in handy later.

Yes, IF Sovereign is stopped. If not then the Ascension will not be of much help later. And not to forget that the attack of the Citadel showed quite well how useless a Dreadnought is when it is at the receiving end of an ambush. Which for all we know  is the favorite tactic of both geth and reapers. Sure in the offensive the Ascension would be great, but had Sovereign succeeded then there wouldn't be many offensives left. 

mcsupersport wrote...
2) Didn't want to leave a cloud of geth ships behind me while trying to defead an unknown dreadnought.

this "cloud" of geth ships was currently occupied with the citadel fleet, leaving the Alliance fleet free to do what ever they liked. Sending the Fifth fleet into that melee would not only risk the loss of ships (and thus firepower) but also a timely arrival of the fleet at sovereign, giving it time to do what ever it wished, for example simply crushing Shepard into a smear or I don't know activating the citadel relay spilling DOOM^tm over the entire galaxy.

mcsupersport wrote...
3) Help the leaders get out alive, but that was less important than first 2.

This one always really bugged me. Why would the arguably three most important people in the galaxy be "evacuated" into the combat zone. Would it not been safer to evacuate the council to a shelter in one of the supposedly impenetrable wards or (as a contingency in case the citadel falls) onto a small inconspicuous frigate heading out of the combat area as fast as possible instead of bringing them onto the slow and sluggish Dreadnought which practically screams "shoot me!"?

mcsupersport wrote...
ME2 three reasons to destroy the base.
1) Didn't think we would be able to maintain control of it once the Reapers start attacking, at an unknown time, which may prevent later destruction of it.

The installation of a self destruct mechanism could help in that. Of course that only helps if it can be activated before the reapers regain control of the station.

mcsupersport wrote...
2) Didn't think humans could safely study a Reaper facility or get anything useful before the Reapers took it back, and or indoctrinated everyone involved.

That is based on two assumptions: 1. The Reapers will come sooner than later and 2. That the base contains Reaper indoctrination technology. The first one is probably true from a metagaming POV, since honestly "Mass Effect 3 - the adventures of grandpa shepard" doesn't sound too exciting, to me at least. The second assumption might or might not be true. The reapers themselves cause indoctrination as do their indoctrination devices (duh) they have conveniently left behind to be found by hapless excavation teams. On the other hand mass relays do not seem to cause indoctrination, as does the citadel. Ok considering the behavior of the council in ME2 the latter may be up for debate. In the end: the ability of the collector base to cause indoctrination is simply unknown.

mcsupersport wrote...
3) Didn't think TIM would use the base in a safe manner, more likely to create Reapers again, thereby causing me to have to fight them twice.

I for my part trust TIM. I trust him that he will do something incredibly stupid and selfish with that base. But creating Reapers with it is quite a far stretch. I for my part doubt that his human supremacy agenda includes sentient, omnicidal dreadnoughts.


So in the end, trying to save the council in ME1 is not idiocy but simply a leap of faith, a selfish and irresponsible leap of faith nonetheless (imho). Sure the council is important no one is denying that, but the need of the many outweighs the need of the few. At the end of ME1 billions upon billions of lives are at stake and increasing that risk further for the chance to save 10,000 soldiers + 3 politicians is certainly not the safest course of action.
Sure, with humanity in power the galaxy has certainly taken a turn for the worse, but if saving the council would have allowed sovereign to succeed then that becomes somewhat of a moot point with all the galactic extermination and stuff.

However the end of ME2 requires both sides to take a leap of faith. Destroying the base requires the belief that the reapers can be defeated without using their technology...somehow.
Keeping the base requires the belief that valuable and helpful information and technology can be recovered AND that it will not come back later to bite you in the ass.

Unfortunately Bioware has failed to actually add consequences to Paragon and Renegade behavior. In the games a Paragons willingness to to what (Shepard considers) right despite the increased risks never comes back with bad consequences (Elnora can be considered as a subversion to this). The same can be said for a Renegades willingness to allow sacrifices for the greater good.
Looking at this playing a Paragon is the better choice, because Shepard WILL succeed in his task, no matter what he does. From an ingame perspective I must say: Being tasked with no less than preventing the apocalypse requires some morals to take a backseat if you want to succeed.

But there is one thing that bugs me: Where does the assumption that a paragon does his best to make the galaxy a better place come from? A paragon does what s/he thinks is right, not what is good for every one. Let us just look at some Paragon decisions (keep in mind that this is from an in universe perspective at the moment of the decisions, so no hindsight):

Releasing the rachni queen: They were a threat once and the only way to stop them was by genocide. It's not like she could be lying when she said she would not attack other races again. I mean it's not like she is utterly at your mercy or anything.

(Wanting to) undo the genophage: The krogan rebellions where a product of krogan aggressiveness and a birth rate that rivals tribbles. The krogan are still aggressive and the only thing preventing them from waging war when ever they want are their low numbers.

Saving the workers on Zorya: Saved a few hundred workers. Well done, no doubt about that. But Vido escapes, the Blue Suns leadership remains in place and one of the most notorious mercenary bands can happily continue their activities which include such funny little things like: robbery, extortion, murder, slave taking, slavery  and piracy. The galaxy is certainly a better place thanks to them.

Rewriting the heretics: Sure Shepard, let as just absolve the heretics from all their guilt and let them return to the rest of the geth. It's not like they could come to the conclusion again that following the reapers might be a good idea, and this time with all geth backing them up. (This is one of the worst things a paragon can do imho as s/he turns out to be a hypocrite who would not brainwash an organic but has no problem robbing a sentient machine of their free will)

So in the end a Paragon does not alway do things which are best for everyone but which are "good" in Shepards eyes. And just for the record: A Renegade is equally short sighted some of the time.

Now this thread has become longer than I anticipated, so I shall end for now.

edit: removed some spelling errors, a real pest those buggers

Modifié par C4Clan, 23 mars 2010 - 09:28 .

[Sturmwulfe]

Ahglock wrote...


Good tactics to win a battle, not the strategy i'd use to win the war.  storming the beaches of Normandy sucked and people got chewed to hell.  the tactics of the battle sucked and basically were if we zerg rush them enough eventually we will get through.  it was a needed strategy to win the war.  So in the fight against the reaper was your goal to survive the fight with the least casualites or to stop the reaper.  I think the overarching goal was to stop the reaper and your strategy has to focus on that. 

Actually, the Battle of Normandy was very well planned out and while the casualties were high, they could have been a lot worse. Notice there was still a sizable military to hold Normandy for another 14 days and eventually retake Paris, while pushing towards Germany. It was hardly a 'let's throw waves of men at entrenched defences and hope it turns out well', that is a ****ty wager that I'd never make. You can't take a beach head and not expect casualties, as there is little to no cover, the enemy is long prepared for your arrival, and you have very little armour support. If it were a 'Zerg rush', there wouldn't have been designated sectors, plans for breaching defences, contingency plans for holding the beach after it was taken, and what have you. It wasn't like Stalingrad where the Soviets threw waves of unprepared conscripts with little training and equipment to fight a battle hardened and very experienced and well equipped Axis forces and loss of life on both sides made it the bloodiest battle in history. Back to Normandy, the Allies learned from Dieppe and did things like tricking the Germans to believe the main landing would be at Calais so the Normandy defences would be caught off guard and have little to no support by back up regiments as they'd be well East, air and sea coastal bombarding for hours well before the actual landings, and airborne raids behind the lines to divert German forces, rally the French resistance, and sabotage Germany supply lines, neutralize weapons, et cetera.

Long story short, kind of a bad comparison.

[Minaach]

I don't know about you guys but, I for one welcome our controlling overlords.

But in all seriousness, Cerberus = Terrorists. You opposed them in ME1 and stopped them from creating sick experiments on humankind. What kind of a group says it's for humanity but butchers the people it has to "protect". TIM is an ass, and should be told to F off and diaf.



Shepard's paragon personality is for no one to die, unless with good reason. He asks questions and might shoot later. Renegade Shep prefers the shoot everything, nuke it, stab them, light them on fire, then ask questions method.



Say what you want, I'm not giving TIM that base. Since I already have a theory with him employing the collectors in the first place...and being tied to the reapers.

[mcsupersport]

C4Clan wrote......





Saving the workers on Zorya: Saved a few hundred workers. Well done, no doubt about that. But Vido escapes, the Blue Suns leadership remains in place and one of the most notorious mercenary bands can happily continue their activities which include such funny little things like: robbery, extortion, murder, slave taking, slavery and piracy. The galaxy is certainly a better place thanks to them.

Actually your job, as hired through Zaeed, wasn't to kill Vido but to retake the refinery. Killing Vido was Zaeed's personal quest and above and beyond the mission. Also to believe the Blue Suns will just fall apart because their "leader" dies is naive at best. The Blue Suns seem to be multi-thousand strong, and built into loose groups with leaders of each "division." So there would be a plan for replacing Vido, because there is no way a mercenary group would believe their commander would live forever when he is in hostile situations. It might cause a hick-up but not much more than if the leader of Germany was killed, then his successor would simply step up. There might be some short term infighting, and "civil war" between factions, but the group is too big, and militarist to just stop functioning with his death.

[Ahglock]

Sturmwulfe wrote...

Ahglock wrote...


Good tactics to win a battle, not the strategy i'd use to win the war.  storming the beaches of Normandy sucked and people got chewed to hell.  the tactics of the battle sucked and basically were if we zerg rush them enough eventually we will get through.  it was a needed strategy to win the war.  So in the fight against the reaper was your goal to survive the fight with the least casualites or to stop the reaper.  I think the overarching goal was to stop the reaper and your strategy has to focus on that. 

Actually, the Battle of Normandy was very well planned out and while the casualties were high, they could have been a lot worse. Notice there was still a sizable military to hold Normandy for another 14 days and eventually retake Paris, while pushing towards Germany. It was hardly a 'let's throw waves of men at entrenched defences and hope it turns out well', that is a ****ty wager that I'd never make. You can't take a beach head and not expect casualties, as there is little to no cover, the enemy is long prepared for your arrival, and you have very little armour support. If it were a 'Zerg rush', there wouldn't have been designated sectors, plans for breaching defences, contingency plans for holding the beach after it was taken, and what have you. It wasn't like Stalingrad where the Soviets threw waves of unprepared conscripts with little training and equipment to fight a battle hardened and very experienced and well equipped Axis forces and loss of life on both sides made it the bloodiest battle in history. Back to Normandy, the Allies learned from Dieppe and did things like tricking the Germans to believe the main landing would be at Calais so the Normandy defences would be caught off guard and have little to no support by back up regiments as they'd be well East, air and sea coastal bombarding for hours well before the actual landings, and airborne raids behind the lines to divert German forces, rally the French resistance, and sabotage Germany supply lines, neutralize weapons, et cetera.

Long story short, kind of a bad comparison.

Actually it is a very good comparison, i could have phrased it better but its an awesome comparison none the less.  Yes, they had planned out the normandy attack well.  It does not chnage that you are throwing people into a meat grinder which is generally a bad tactic.  It is an good strategy though if since they needed to take the beach head for victory,and they did everything they could to make it successful.  things that would reduce there chances of achieving the objective are a bad strategy, things that improve it a good strategy.  The objective to win the war in ME1 was to take down soveriegn before he summoned his friends, anything you do to reduce those odds of success is bad, anything you do to increase the odds is good.  Focusing on Sovereign is the best choice since it does the most to increase your odds of defeating soverign, helping the council is bad since it reduces your chances at sotpping soveriegn even if it gives you the "best" ending if you suceed.  Taking down sovereign is going to cause losses and heavy losses at that, there is no way around that, he is the beachhead you want to take.  Diverting forces away from defeating sovereign is just a bad plan. 

[mcsupersport]

Ahglock wrote...



Actually it is a very good comparison, i could have phrased it better but its an awesome comparison none the less.  Yes, they had planned out the normandy attack well.  It does not chnage that you are throwing people into a meat grinder which is generally a bad tactic.  It is an good strategy though if since they needed to take the beach head for victory,and they did everything they could to make it successful.  things that would reduce there chances of achieving the objective are a bad strategy, things that improve it a good strategy.  The objective to win the war in ME1 was to take down soveriegn before he summoned his friends, anything you do to reduce those odds of success is bad, anything you do to increase the odds is good.  Focusing on Sovereign is the best choice since it does the most to increase your odds of defeating soverign, helping the council is bad since it reduces your chances at sotpping soveriegn even if it gives you the "best" ending if you suceed.  Taking down sovereign is going to cause losses and heavy losses at that, there is no way around that, he is the beachhead you want to take.  Diverting forces away from defeating sovereign is just a bad plan. 

But my point was that it would have been the same as having the undeated navies of Germany and Italy sitting just up the coast from the landing.  Letting an allied battleship group take them on and get sunk, but leave most of the fleet there within sailing distance of the Landings.  Do you dispatch a force to destroy them and save the battleship or let them destroy the ship and continue to threaten the landing area???

[FredThePhoenix]

My main character is a Renegade one since I prefer that side. Don't get me wrong, Paragon is great, but it's naive most of the time. This isn't Final Fantasy or some kid game. I always felt that Mass Effect was a more mature RPG and in a real world, there's no real 'heroes'. There's just better choices. If I was Shepard in real life, I'd be a Renegade (or Renegon) simply because that's how you would get the best results (not always though) and fast.

In Mass Effect, most Renegade choice makes more sense.

1- When you can save the Council in Mass Effect 1. I mean, come on, who would seriously waste reinforcements on the Destiny Ascension when Sovereign is about the open the Citadel Mass Relay to end all life in the galaxy? Even when playing as a Paragon, I find it hard to accept and I thought it was a complete idiotic decision. Screw the Council and the 10 000 crew of the Destiny Ascension. There's not only the millions of cilivians of the Citadel to save, but there's also everyone on Earth, Palaven, Irune, Thessia, Kahje, the Migrant Fleet and every homeworld out there. WINNER: Renegade

2- Tons of years in the past, the Rachni threathned everything in the galaxy. They were completely dangerous, brutal, organized and intelligent. If not for the Krogan, who could pursue them to their lair, I don't think the Rachni War could have been won. Now, after witnessing what a Rachni Queen can do to the Peak 15 Station (even indirectly), you'd be willing to let a Rachni Queen go freely just like that? Idiotic decison again. Sure, the Rachni Queen tells you about her children being out of control and the reasons of it, but you can't just let a threat that big go freely like that, just out of pure trust. It's irresponsible and foolish. WINNER: Renegade

3- Destroy the Collector Base or don't? Don't. You don't know what the future brings, but the Reapers are coming and it's no time for grudges to get in the way. If you don't like the Illusive Man, it's your personal choice. You don't have to destroy maybe very valuable technology for a victory against the Reapers just because of your goddamn feeling. If the Illusive Man proves to be a problem with it, you can always destroy it later, but if you destroy it now, every species in the galaxy might be doomed because of it. Sure, Reaper technology might be risky, but there's Reaper tech in the Normandy, EDI and I'm sure even in the revived Shepard. WINNER: Renegade

I'll stop here but I could go on on many other decisions too. Just another short one... Just look on how you talk to Mordin Solus if you're a Paragon character. You're obviously telling him that he's almost a monster for the Genophage. STG did countless simulations for the Genophage and they are geniuses. It was authorized by the Council if memory serves. If not for the Genophage, Shepard might not even have been there to talk to Mordin in the first place. It was necessary.

I'm not saying all Regenade decisions are the best, like choosing Morinth over Samara (that's completely insane), but most of them are more logical over the Paragon choice.

[Ahglock]

mcsupersport wrote...

Ahglock wrote...



Actually it is a very good comparison, i could have phrased it better but its an awesome comparison none the less.  Yes, they had planned out the normandy attack well.  It does not chnage that you are throwing people into a meat grinder which is generally a bad tactic.  It is an good strategy though if since they needed to take the beach head for victory,and they did everything they could to make it successful.  things that would reduce there chances of achieving the objective are a bad strategy, things that improve it a good strategy.  The objective to win the war in ME1 was to take down soveriegn before he summoned his friends, anything you do to reduce those odds of success is bad, anything you do to increase the odds is good.  Focusing on Sovereign is the best choice since it does the most to increase your odds of defeating soverign, helping the council is bad since it reduces your chances at sotpping soveriegn even if it gives you the "best" ending if you suceed.  Taking down sovereign is going to cause losses and heavy losses at that, there is no way around that, he is the beachhead you want to take.  Diverting forces away from defeating sovereign is just a bad plan. 

But my point was that it would have been the same as having the undeated navies of Germany and Italy sitting just up the coast from the landing.  Letting an allied battleship group take them on and get sunk, but leave most of the fleet there within sailing distance of the Landings.  Do you dispatch a force to destroy them and save the battleship or let them destroy the ship and continue to threaten the landing area???

If you need the fleet to take the beach, you let the navy sink your battleship.  That is what distractions were invented for.  The ascention and the rest of the citidel fleet was out there being an awesome distraction.  Do you risk everything and go save them or do you take the opening and kill the reaper. 

I really don't think there is a right answer to this question by the way.  Everyone has a different perspective on how they think the battle should go.  this is an area where there is no wrong answer, as a game it is specifically set up to be that way.  The information given about the battle situation is vague enough that any of the 3 decisions is a valid choice.  Okay maybe not the pure renegade answer, that one just came across as effing stupid to me. 

[Kudara]

Actually it was just a matter of timing on the Destiny's Ascention, no matter what the Fifth Fleet needed to destroy the geth ships outside of the Citadel before they closed in on Soverign.  Otherwise they would have gotten thier asses chewed up betwen the two.

Clearing out the geth and letting the Ascention escape is not a poor tactical choice.  Oh I know it's presented that way. like your sacrificing your ships for them, but a clear minded tactical look at the situation will tell you that its not all the big deal it was made out to be.  You would have had to do it either way.

Its just whether or not your going to save the ship or let it be destroyed so you can put in a human lead or all human council.  So yes it is a paragon/renegade decision.

Kudara

[Ahglock]

FredThePhoenix wrote...

My main character is a Renegade one since I prefer that side. Don't get me wrong, Paragon is great, but it's naive most of the time. This isn't Final Fantasy or some kid game. I always felt that Mass Effect was a more mature RPG and in a real world, there's no real 'heroes'. There's just better choices. If I was Shepard in real life, I'd be a Renegade (or Renegon) simply because that's how you would get the best results (not always though) and fast.

In Mass Effect, most Renegade choice makes more sense.

Sme of the bigger choices like the rachni there is an argument for renegade, most renegade choices are just shepard being an ****.  I saved the Rachni though, I felt everyone deserves a a chance to change.  Sur ethye may cause epic problems in the future, but if you don't give them that chance what exactly are you saving?  Just another group of rachni just the kind on two legs and a whole lot softer skin. 

[BaladasDemnevanni]

FredThePhoenix wrote...

3- Destroy the Collector Base or don't? Don't. You don't know what the future brings, but the Reapers are coming and it's no time for grudges to get in the way. If you don't like the Illusive Man, it's your personal choice. You don't have to destroy maybe very valuable technology for a victory against the Reapers just because of your goddamn feeling. If the Illusive Man proves to be a problem with it, you can always destroy it later, but if you destroy it now, every species in the galaxy might be doomed because of it. Sure, Reaper technology might be risky, but there's Reaper tech in the Normandy, EDI and I'm sure even in the revived Shepard. WINNER: Renegade

Just want to address this one point for now.

3. This isn't just an issue of morals. In ME, we learned from Sovereign that the purpose of the Citadel and Mass Relays is to ensure that organics do not evolve technologically in a way the Reapers can't predict. By holding onto the Collector Base, you are once again following the Reapers' footsteps. I didn't destroy the base because I only wanted to screw TIM over, it also makes sense that if the Reapers are to be defeated, then organics must develop their own technology, which the Reapers are not aware of. Legion comments on this too after the suicide mission on how it is overall better to for organics to use their unpredictability to their advantage.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 23 mars 2010 - 10:37 .

[Raphael diSanto]

Eh, 'good guy' choices are generally dumb, from a tactical point of view. Hollywood and popular fiction are littered with examples of the good guy going back to rescue the heroine when really, he shouldn't, or defusing the bomb when he could have just run away because technically "the objective:" was completed, or.. or .. or ...



But due to the way popular fiction works, the hero still gets time to save the girl, defuse the bomb, and rescue Martha's cat.



That's the way Hollywood works, and like it or not, computer games, especially cRPGs are becoming more and more cinematic with each generation.