184 réponses à ce sujet

[smudboy]

Wrex4Prez wrote...

It is like removing a heart from a person.  If we remove Shepard from ME1 after a certain point, the plot can't continue.  Which is why in ME2, Shepard isn't plot integral, because if we remove him from the plot, the plot can go on just fine.

But you don't get the Reaper IFF without Shep because Legion doesn't even got to the derelict reaper without him.  Nor does he snipe those husks (which, yeah, you could have dealt with without the help).  Nor does he ensure the doors to the Core Room remain open.

Without the Reaper IFF, no Collector Base.

I see what you're saying a little bit more now, but I still think the methodology is flawed by viewing ME2 in isolation.

Legion does not cause nor prevent one from acquiring the IFF.  Unless you're arguing that Legion is plot integral because of sniping those husks behind Shepard?

[Wrex4Prez]

smudboy wrote...

Wrex4Prez wrote...
So, if a tree falls in the woods and nobody's around, does it make a sound?

Yes, oscillation is real.

I've heard the arguments on that thread in a number of different connotations.  I've always taken the view that, no, it doesn't make a sound.  I take the philosophical view that we are only important through others.  If we go through our lives and never interact with anyone, we don't exist. 

We're not arguing whether or not someone exists because others say or think so.  This is not an argument of existence.  I'm saying we can replace Shepard with ersatz Shepard with no change to the plot of ME2, because their actions, and their role as a protagonist, could be done by anyone.

Put in the Mass Effect context, this an important view.  Because in ME2, Shepard quite literally doesn't exist except through the choices of others.  Does that make him less integral to the plot of ME2?  NO!  Emphatically not.  In fact, it makes him MORE integral.  The universe has chosen him.  TIM.  The Reapers.  The Collectors.  Tali.  Liara.  Ashley Williams.  Wrex.  The Rachni Queen (depending on choice).  Many others.  They understand and acknowledge what he has done and put faith in what he will do.  And all those alliances are integral to the overall story arc.

Shepard exists within the narrative due to TIM/Miranda.  Existence does not imply plot integrity.  For example, Tali's MacGuffin causes her to exist in ME1.  After that, she is replaceable.

It doesn't matter if the entire universe revolves around Shepard (which nearly every news story seems to state.)  If Shepard does not act, or do, or show any token or value, that Shepard and only Shepard could do, that causes the plot to continue, then Shepard is replaceable. (i.e. having a Prothean vision to go to A->B in the plot.)

And again, just limited to ME2, the whole thing doesn't take place without him.  TIM, the Reapers, the Collectors...they all made him important enough to revice and/or follow around.  Legion, too.  So who could we stick in there and replace Shepard and still have the same story?

We could replace Shepard with someone else, and the plot would be fine, yes. That's what I'm saying.

Could someone else theoretically defeat the Collectors?  Maybe.  But it becomes a different story altogether.

I'm sure some lines of dialog would be different, but the plot would be the same.

Your answer to the tree falling question tells me all I need to know.  We won't agree.  Our fundamental philosophies are different.

Interesting that you choose to ignore the more real aspects of how Shep is important, though; specifically, no IFF because no help from Legion because he's not even there if there's no Shep involved. 

Same plot?  You seemed at first to know a good bit about narrative technique and literary theory, but very basic (and through to the more advances) theory will tell you that one character change will alter an entire plot, even a story that is primarily plot-driven, especially when the writers of the story have chosen to focus on a primary character and that character is the one who is taken out of the story.

If it would be the same plot, why then did TIM wait until Shep was awakened to counter-attack collectors?  I sniff importance by the very virtue of that fact.  You seem to think it's unimportant to the thread.  Again, fundamental differences that are irreconcilable.

[Wrex4Prez]

smudboy wrote...

Wrex4Prez wrote...

It is like removing a heart from a person.  If we remove Shepard from ME1 after a certain point, the plot can't continue.  Which is why in ME2, Shepard isn't plot integral, because if we remove him from the plot, the plot can go on just fine.

But you don't get the Reaper IFF without Shep because Legion doesn't even got to the derelict reaper without him.  Nor does he snipe those husks (which, yeah, you could have dealt with without the help).  Nor does he ensure the doors to the Core Room remain open.

Without the Reaper IFF, no Collector Base.

I see what you're saying a little bit more now, but I still think the methodology is flawed by viewing ME2 in isolation.

Legion does not cause nor prevent one from acquiring the IFF.  Unless you're arguing that Legion is plot integral because of sniping those husks behind Shepard?

Sorry, not the Reaper IFF.  They got that right before the core room.  They wouldn't have destroyed the core without Legion, though, and my memory seems to say that the core-destruction was pretty vital to their actually getting off the ship.  Or was EDI lying about that whole barrier thing?  Without Legion, who is only there by virtue of Shep, no core destruction.  Shep has the IFF, but he can't leave the ship with it. 

[Ladi]

There is exactly one character essential to ME2, and that is Mordin. Without him, you wouldn't have a bug countermeasure, and the game would end on Horizon. Nothing anyone else does is plot relevant.



For the suicide mission, any number of disposable Cerberus lackeys/Miranda/Jacob could have done the job. They just would have died, which makes it, you know, a suicide mission.



If Tim had left Shep dead, what would have changed? Garrus, Mordin, Thane, Kasumi, Zaeed, maybe even Samara and Legion would help whoever. Tali, Jack and Grunt maybe wouldn't join if it wasn't for Shep, but it's not like there's something only they can do.



As far as the game actually shows, Tim should have saved the 4 billion credits and used them to buy upgrades for the Normandy 2. Shep's admirable ability to get everyone out alive by acting as their guidance counsellor is commendable, but ultimately worthless.

[Teknor]

Ladi wrote...

There is exactly one character essential to ME2, and that is Mordin. Without him, you wouldn't have a bug countermeasure, and the game would end on Horizon. Nothing anyone else does is plot relevant.

For the suicide mission, any number of disposable Cerberus lackeys/Miranda/Jacob could have done the job. They just would have died, which makes it, you know, a suicide mission.

If Tim had left Shep dead, what would have changed? Garrus, Mordin, Thane, Kasumi, Zaeed, maybe even Samara and Legion would help whoever. Tali, Jack and Grunt maybe wouldn't join if it wasn't for Shep, but it's not like there's something only they can do.

As far as the game actually shows, Tim should have saved the 4 billion credits and used them to buy upgrades for the Normandy 2. Shep's admirable ability to get everyone out alive by acting as their guidance counsellor is commendable, but ultimately worthless.

None of those makes any sense except Mordin part.

[Ladi]

Teknor wrote...
None of those makes any sense except Mordin part.

How do you figure? Garrus would help stop the Collectors because that's his character, plus you'd have saved him from all the mercs on Omega. Mordin would help whoever distributed the vaccine, as well as for the intellectual challenge. Thane is gonna die anyway and joins you cos he figures he might as well make a difference. Samara sees the Collectors as a worthy adversary. Zaeed and Kasumi are just on a payroll. You already have Miranda and Jacob.

There you have five tech experts, four leaders and three biotics, more than enough to get the job done. The only thing Shep brings is the ability to do loyalty quests and have these people come out alive at the end, which isn't actually necessary for the purpose of the game. Those 4 billion credits could have gone towards a Thanix Cannon, armour plating and improved shields.

I don't recall why Legion is on the Reaper, but he's clearly there before Shep is and doesn't have any reason to know that Shepard will be coming (or that Shepard is even alive) so I'm sure events would play out in the same way.

[Raphael diSanto]

Is it just me or is this entire discussion somewhat pointless.

Stories have a protagonist. What was special about John McLane in Die Hard? He just happened to be a tough cop in a the wrong place at the wrong time. What was so special about Han Solo in Star Wars? He just happened to be the smuggler going the right way and offering a ride to the right place for the right price when Luke and Obi Wan showed up.

All stories need a protagonist, a lead character, even stories that are about teams like ME. The A-Team had Hannibal. The Dirty Dozen had Lee Marvin (I don't remember the character's name). At the end of the day, for many stories, an argument can be made that that protagonist can be anybody. In this story, it's Shepard.

Now, obviously, there's examples of the other kind of protagonist too. Harry Potter is who he is, and the stories wouldn't exist without him having the kind of background that he has. But stories don't -have- to have a protagonist like that. In fact, often the best ones don't.

Taking the Die Hard example again - The entire movie is based around a coincidence; that McClane is visiting his wife on the very night Gruber attacks the building. To me, that resonates with Saren attacking Eden Prime coincidentally the same time that Shepard's first 'test' Spectre candidacy mission happens.

Modifié par Raphael diSanto, 23 avril 2010 - 07:23 .

[smudboy]

Interesting that you choose to ignore the more real aspects of how Shep is important, though; specifically, no IFF because no help from Legion because he's not even there if there's no Shep involved.

It doesn't matter if Shepard is God.  If Shepard/God does not do anything that Shepard/God and only Shepard/God can do, which would cause the plot to continue, then they're irrelevant to the plot.

Same plot?  You seemed at first to know a good bit about narrative technique and literary theory, but very basic (and through to the more advances) theory will tell you that one character change will alter an entire plot, even a story that is primarily plot-driven, especially when the writers of the story have chosen to focus on a primary character and that character is the one who is taken out of the story.

This is Shepard's story.  I'm not denying it.  However, this Shepard is irrelevant to the plot.  Shepard could be sitting in his cabin the entire game while the player character controls someone else.

If it would be the same plot, why then did TIM wait until Shep was awakened to counter-attack collectors?  I sniff importance by the very virtue of that fact.  You seem to think it's unimportant to the thread.  Again, fundamental differences that are irreconcilable.

In fear of repeating myself of what it means to be plot relevant, I'm still talking about, and only about, the plot of ME2, not TIM's opinions of whatever.  If you have no evidence or can point to any event in the plot, where something that ME2 Shepard does that can only be done by ME2 Shepard, and if taken away will destroy the plot, then ME2 Shepard is simply not relevant to the plot.

[smudboy]

@Ladi
Correct.

[smudboy]

Raphael diSanto wrote...

Is it just me or is this entire discussion somewhat pointless.

Stories have a protagonist. What was special about John McLane in Die Hard? He just happened to be a tough cop in a the wrong place at the wrong time. What was so special about Han Solo in Star Wars? He just happened to be the smuggler going the right way and offering a ride to the right place for the right price when Luke and Obi Wan showed up.

All stories need a protagonist, a lead character, even stories that are about teams like ME. The A-Team had Hannibal. The Dirty Dozen had Lee Marvin (I don't remember the character's name). At the end of the day, for many stories, an argument can be made that that protagonist can be anybody. In this story, it's Shepard.

Now, obviously, there's examples of the other kind of protagonist too. Harry Potter is who he is, and the stories wouldn't exist without him having the kind of background that he has. But stories don't -have- to have a protagonist like that. In fact, often the best ones don't.

Taking the Die Hard example again - The entire movie is based around a coincidence; that McClane is visiting his wife on the very night Gruber attacks the building. To me, that resonates with Saren attacking Eden Prime coincidentally the same time that Shepard's first 'test' Spectre candidacy mission happens.

This isn't about the role of a protagonist, but the role of the character (Shepard) as a protagonist.  Shepard in ME2 does not have any plot devices, (e.g. MacGuffin's) that allow the plot to continue (compare that to Mordin, or Tali from ME1.)  What Ladi and I are saying is that anyone could've replaced Shepard (and per Ladi, many of the other characters, save Mordin), because they have no plot device.

(Nevermind that a good story should have an active protagonist.  Be a round, dynamic character with an arc, as well.  If some side-characters can get arcs, why can't the protagonist?)

[smudboy]

Wrex4Prez wrote...
Sorry, not the Reaper IFF.  They got that right before the core room.  They wouldn't have destroyed the core without Legion, though, and my memory seems to say that the core-destruction was pretty vital to their actually getting off the ship.  Or was EDI lying about that whole barrier thing?  Without Legion, who is only there by virtue of Shep, no core destruction.  Shep has the IFF, but he can't leave the ship with it. 

It doesn't exactly ring a bell what Legion was doing there to cause the core to go boom or open or what not.  I'm also sure Legion was there before Shepard arrived.  (Again, I'm not clear on the happenstance.)

[Raphael diSanto]

smudboy wrote...

Raphael diSanto wrote...

Is it just me or is this entire discussion somewhat pointless.

Stories have a protagonist. What was special about John McLane in Die Hard? He just happened to be a tough cop in a the wrong place at the wrong time. What was so special about Han Solo in Star Wars? He just happened to be the smuggler going the right way and offering a ride to the right place for the right price when Luke and Obi Wan showed up.

All stories need a protagonist, a lead character, even stories that are about teams like ME. The A-Team had Hannibal. The Dirty Dozen had Lee Marvin (I don't remember the character's name). At the end of the day, for many stories, an argument can be made that that protagonist can be anybody. In this story, it's Shepard.

Now, obviously, there's examples of the other kind of protagonist too. Harry Potter is who he is, and the stories wouldn't exist without him having the kind of background that he has. But stories don't -have- to have a protagonist like that. In fact, often the best ones don't.

Taking the Die Hard example again - The entire movie is based around a coincidence; that McClane is visiting his wife on the very night Gruber attacks the building. To me, that resonates with Saren attacking Eden Prime coincidentally the same time that Shepard's first 'test' Spectre candidacy mission happens.

This isn't about the role of a protagonist, but the role of the character (Shepard) as a protagonist.  Shepard in ME2 does not have any plot devices, (e.g. MacGuffin's) that allow the plot to continue (compare that to Mordin, or Tali from ME1.)  What Ladi and I are saying is that anyone could've replaced Shepard (and per Ladi, many of the other characters, save Mordin), because they have no plot device.

(Nevermind that a good story should have an active protagonist.  Be a round, dynamic character with an arc, as well.  If some side-characters can get arcs, why can't the protagonist?)

Hmm. I think you may have missed my point. What I was trying to say was that in many popular stories the protagonist is replaceable by someone else too, hence my John McClane and Han Solo examples. Does that make Die Hard a bad movie, because McClane's really just a faceless cop in the wrong place at the wrong time?

I do agree that having an arc is a great idea. I don't think it's wholly necessary, though I definitely agree that it adds to the empathy for the protagonist.

However, in an RPG, I think the rules change a bit. I'm not sure if I can explain my opinion on this issue clearly enough, though. I'm still trying to find the right words. Forgive me if I meander a bit... When I'm playing tabletop RPGs, I create the arc for my character, not the GM. It's my character, and he does what I want and says what I want him to say, and is affected by the events of the story in the way that I want him to be affected by them. That's his arc.

I can do exactly the same thing with Shepard. Every Shepard's different, and there's 9 combinations of background to choose from. So given where Shepard starts from and where he (or she) is at the end of ME2, I think there's definitely potential for the "arc" to exist. No, it isn't given to you explicitly in the game, because there's too many options, too many possibilities. Which parts of the story are going to be important to -your- Shepard? Tali's Lloyalty mission? Meeting up with Garrus again? Rescuing the Horizon colonists?

The game puts no emphasis on these, because BioWare don't know in advance, which parts their players are going to want to be important for -their- Shepard.

It's definitely possible to write an arc for a character over which you know the motivations and personality of. It's much more difficult to write an arc for a character whose personality and personal history you don't know.

[Raphael diSanto]

smudboy wrote...

Wrex4Prez wrote...
Sorry, not the Reaper IFF.  They got that right before the core room.  They wouldn't have destroyed the core without Legion, though, and my memory seems to say that the core-destruction was pretty vital to their actually getting off the ship.  Or was EDI lying about that whole barrier thing?  Without Legion, who is only there by virtue of Shep, no core destruction.  Shep has the IFF, but he can't leave the ship with it. 

It doesn't exactly ring a bell what Legion was doing there to cause the core to go boom or open or what not.  I'm also sure Legion was there before Shepard arrived.  (Again, I'm not clear on the happenstance.)

Yeah. Legion was there before Shepard, otherwise he wouldn't have been ahead of him on the ship. I don't recall if it's ever explained why he's there, since he's supposed to be tracking Shepard instead of being ahead of him.

He -is- essential for opening the barrier to the ME Core room. And unless EDI's lying, overloading the ME Core is the only way off the ship.

[David Knight]

Ah. Smudboy, I believe I was talking about something else. Sorry about that. I do indeed agree that Shepard is replaceable. Completely. However, so are most protagonists of stories. My discussion was referring to the name of the threat title, talking about why Shepard was special. He is replaceable. So is Han Solo, and James Bond, and Ethan Hunt, and many other heroes from other stories. However, just because he is replaceable does not mean he is your average joe. I already listed my reasons for why my Shepard is special. I won't bother to repeat them.
Again, sorry for the confusion on my part.

[DarthCyclopsRLZ]

I'm not gonna defend ME2's disturbingly thin plot, but *why* is a character being replaceable a *bad* thing?

[David Knight]

I liked the plot of ME2... the entire idea of gathering your team mission-by-mission and the loyalty quests (some of which had interesting philosophical and moral lessons, such as Mordin or Jacob's, or love stories like Miranda or Thane's) were really good. But... that's not the point of this thread. Sorry. Uh... didn't mean to get off topic.

[Ladi]

DarthCyclopsRLZ wrote...

I'm not gonna defend ME2's disturbingly thin plot, but *why* is a character being replaceable a *bad* thing?

It's a bad thing when the whole premise of the game is built around them being irreplaceable. Another example of this would be LotR. Frodo isn't actually irreplaceable - he's a guy who can shoulder the burden of the ring, but so are Gandalf and Galadriel. They decide to leave the ring with him because frankly if he puts it on, what's he gonna do? Go around invisible stealing apples?

The vital character in that story is Sam. Without Sam, Frodo would have starved to death, been eaten by a spider, been captured by orcs, failed to get up the mountain and, if you notice, he doesn't even bloody throw the ring into the fire anyway, Gollum does. Also when Sam has to carry the ring for a while, he is able to give it back to Frodo pretty much immediately.

[smudboy]

Ladi wrote...

DarthCyclopsRLZ wrote...

I'm not gonna defend ME2's disturbingly thin plot, but *why* is a character being replaceable a *bad* thing?

It's a bad thing when the whole premise of the game is built around them being irreplaceable. Another example of this would be LotR. Frodo isn't actually irreplaceable - he's a guy who can shoulder the burden of the ring, but so are Gandalf and Galadriel. They decide to leave the ring with him because frankly if he puts it on, what's he gonna do? Go around invisible stealing apples?

The vital character in that story is Sam. Without Sam, Frodo would have starved to death, been eaten by a spider, been captured by orcs, failed to get up the mountain and, if you notice, he doesn't even bloody throw the ring into the fire anyway, Gollum does. Also when Sam has to carry the ring for a while, he is able to give it back to Frodo pretty much immediately.

And this is the main problem of ME2: Shepard is replaceable, yet this is "Shepard's Story."  How?

(An argument could be made for Mordin, that he could be replaced by his assistant, but that's the only other option.)

TIM/Miranda brought Shepard back because of r1, r2, r3 reasons.  That's fine.  But the plot needs to be shown why Shepard's relevant, and only Shepard.  ME1 Shepard had the visions and cipher, without that, plot goes boom.  But in ME2, Shepard didn't have to also become Cyber Jesus.  Now his "proof of purchase" is going to have to be on biblical levels.  I was hoping for crazy hellish prophetic Prothean Nightmare-50k Collector General communications, his implants reacting to Reaper devices and debris in the Citadel, Shepard being unable to control his emotions/unknowingly indoctrinating those around him while he's trying not to murder Miranda.  Instead, we get store discounts.  If a more realistic setting: TIM/Miranda needed the best leader against an enmey, and that's fine; provided Shepard's leadership skills are better than the best, and plot integral.  But they weren't.

Characters join a suicide mission at the drop of a hat, and then need to "clear their conscience" despite being highly skilled, lethal professionals.  Shepard has the personality of a bucket of bricks and does not grow.  This is Shepard's story by virtue of Shepard simply being in the story.

Modifié par smudboy, 24 avril 2010 - 02:55 .

[Bucky_McLachlan]

Ladi wrote...

It's a bad thing when the whole premise of the game is built around them being irreplaceable. Another example of this would be LotR. Frodo isn't actually irreplaceable - he's a guy who can shoulder the burden of the ring, but so are Gandalf and Galadriel.

This is patently false. Gandalf and Galadriel cannot so much as touch the one ring without their selves becoming a  dark lord, you could argue that any Hobbit could do it but most Hobbits are clearly not fond of doing anything that doesn't involve drinking and eating.

Also the fact that Sam is not tempted by the ring is itself a major story problem, and this is one instance where the films improved on the story, because Sam didn't just go "O hai here's the ring Frodo" and hand it over to him.

Anyways it's important to note that Frodo makes a choice to carry the ring, which is the ONLY requirement for being the protaganist of any story. It's got nothing to do with how capable the person might be, in fact the more capable they are the less possibility there is for conflict and tension and thus the less possibility there is for there to be an actual story. It's all about the protaganist being a person of action who makes choices that dictate how the story plays out. He is never built up as the only guy that can possibly do it, also it's no secret that Tolkien wasn't much of a novelist there's plenty of story problems in his books.

Modifié par Bucky_McLachlan, 25 avril 2010 - 01:24 .

[Wrex4Prez]

Raphael diSanto wrote...

smudboy wrote...

Wrex4Prez wrote...
Sorry, not the Reaper IFF.  They got that right before the core room.  They wouldn't have destroyed the core without Legion, though, and my memory seems to say that the core-destruction was pretty vital to their actually getting off the ship.  Or was EDI lying about that whole barrier thing?  Without Legion, who is only there by virtue of Shep, no core destruction.  Shep has the IFF, but he can't leave the ship with it. 

It doesn't exactly ring a bell what Legion was doing there to cause the core to go boom or open or what not.  I'm also sure Legion was there before Shepard arrived.  (Again, I'm not clear on the happenstance.)

Yeah. Legion was there before Shepard, otherwise he wouldn't have been ahead of him on the ship. I don't recall if it's ever explained why he's there, since he's supposed to be tracking Shepard instead of being ahead of him.

He -is- essential for opening the barrier to the ME Core room. And unless EDI's lying, overloading the ME Core is the only way off the ship.

Unless I'm just adding bits to the story as I see fit (because there are so many holes to fill), I thought Legion explained that he knew Shep was going to be there?

[naledgeborn]

Wrex4Prez wrote...

Raphael diSanto wrote...

smudboy wrote...

Wrex4Prez wrote...
Sorry, not the Reaper IFF.  They got that right before the core room.  They wouldn't have destroyed the core without Legion, though, and my memory seems to say that the core-destruction was pretty vital to their actually getting off the ship.  Or was EDI lying about that whole barrier thing?  Without Legion, who is only there by virtue of Shep, no core destruction.  Shep has the IFF, but he can't leave the ship with it. 

It doesn't exactly ring a bell what Legion was doing there to cause the core to go boom or open or what not.  I'm also sure Legion was there before Shepard arrived.  (Again, I'm not clear on the happenstance.)

Yeah. Legion was there before Shepard, otherwise he wouldn't have been ahead of him on the ship. I don't recall if it's ever explained why he's there, since he's supposed to be tracking Shepard instead of being ahead of him.

He -is- essential for opening the barrier to the ME Core room. And unless EDI's lying, overloading the ME Core is the only way off the ship.

Unless I'm just adding bits to the story as I see fit (because there are so many holes to fill), I thought Legion explained that he knew Shep was going to be there?

Reaper/Heretic virus. It needed an understanding of Reaper software to destroy/counteract it. Legion is there to learn how to speak Reaper basically.

[Wrex4Prez]

naledgeborn wrote...

Wrex4Prez wrote...

Raphael diSanto wrote...

smudboy wrote...

Wrex4Prez wrote...
Sorry, not the Reaper IFF.  They got that right before the core room.  They wouldn't have destroyed the core without Legion, though, and my memory seems to say that the core-destruction was pretty vital to their actually getting off the ship.  Or was EDI lying about that whole barrier thing?  Without Legion, who is only there by virtue of Shep, no core destruction.  Shep has the IFF, but he can't leave the ship with it. 

It doesn't exactly ring a bell what Legion was doing there to cause the core to go boom or open or what not.  I'm also sure Legion was there before Shepard arrived.  (Again, I'm not clear on the happenstance.)

Yeah. Legion was there before Shepard, otherwise he wouldn't have been ahead of him on the ship. I don't recall if it's ever explained why he's there, since he's supposed to be tracking Shepard instead of being ahead of him.

He -is- essential for opening the barrier to the ME Core room. And unless EDI's lying, overloading the ME Core is the only way off the ship.

Unless I'm just adding bits to the story as I see fit (because there are so many holes to fill), I thought Legion explained that he knew Shep was going to be there?

Reaper/Heretic virus. It needed an understanding of Reaper software to destroy/counteract it. Legion is there to learn how to speak Reaper basically.

Yeah, that sounds right.  Well, maybe Shep is interchangeable in ME2.

[Il Divo]

Exactly.  Again, provide the substitute.

 Where does Liara state that Shepard is the only human with a 'strong mind'? This is why I'm skeptical of this claim. Far too much credit is being placed on this 'strong' mind. If you can be skeptical of Illusive Man choosing Shepard because the Reapers fear/respect him, what makes a strong mind of such higher value?

This is not the argument for the entirety of a sequel.  This is the argument for the Shepard character in ME2.  Which you've yet to show me is plot integral.

Remember, we know Shepard is the only human to have killed/interacted with a Reaper. For replaceability, it must be shown that a character can be removed/switched with any other and have the plot remain exactly as is. 

Shepard cannot be removed from existence because otherwise the Collectors are not spurred to attacking human colonies.
 
If he cannot be removed from existence, then he is necessarily required to exist for the plot of Mass Effect 2.

If he is required to exist for the plot of Mass Effect 2, then he must be a potential candidate (even if dead) of Illusive Man's search for a leader to fight the Collectors.

If we accept that Illusive Man is searching for a candidate who has dealt with the Reapers (as he states) and that Shepard is the only human to have done so, then he is plot integral.

Unless you can show me one potential candidate who has also fought a Reaper and holds similar qualifications as Shepard, then without Shepard, the plot does not move beyond Illusive Man choosing a candidate. To argue that Shepard is not integral to Mass Effect 2, you'd need to demonstrate why he does not need to exist for the plot at all, from the very beginning.

Verner would be more than qualified.  Alibi in a very odd, funny way.  He seems genuinely motivated.

I assume you are saying this in gest. I say this because if you are qualifying Verner (of all characters) to lead the fight against the Collectors, I would say I can qualify Kaidan as possessing a strong enough mind to drive the plot of Mass Effect 1. Let us not insult each other with such claims.

Except that mission point is to get Liara so she can get to Ilos.  If that's all, we can eliminate Liara, and simply get another better, older asari researcher.  Which we definitely know there are more of.

I believe the original purpose in acquiring Liara was because she is Benezia's daughter. You might argue that it is a minor point, but this is a part of the main plot. To alter the plot is to not be dealing with the same plot. If Benezia does not have another daughter whom we can find, then Liara is irreplaceable.

If Leia can do the same things Luke can, then they are replaceable.

But can she? As of Episode V, Leia has not expanded her force potential in any way. If we assume she must follow through the role of the main character, then certain actions could not be handled successfully. She would not have survived the Wampa, for example.

Succeed at what?  Shepard does not show any plot Shepard-only combat ability.

He is still far above what the average combatant can perform. Does this make him integral? No. But to imply that Verner is anywhere near Shepard's level (and Illusive Man wants someone of Shepard's level) is an insult to Shepard's abilities. He is or was a Spectre after all. They are not a dime a dozen.  

Motivation is irrelevant to the plot.  It's good for characterization, though.  Zaee'd more than capable.

This is quite wrong. Motivation is everything to the plot. If a character is unmotivated, then they do not take action. If they do not take action, then we have a very different plot. If Zaeed has no reason to stop the Collectors, then he cannot replace Shepard no matter how incredible his combat abilities. Motivation is what caused Luke to join Obi-Wan, to become a Jedi, to fight Darth Vader. Motivation is what spurs all characters to action in any story.

To say that Motivation is irrelevant is a grave error.  As Bucky explains, it's all about a character choosing to take action, aka the Frodo example. It is essential to launching a plot.

Modifié par Il Divo, 25 avril 2010 - 04:36 .

[Ladi]

Bucky_McLachlan wrote...

This is patently false. Gandalf and Galadriel cannot so much as touch the one ring without their selves becoming a  dark lord, you could argue that any Hobbit could do it but most Hobbits are clearly not fond of doing anything that doesn't involve drinking and eating.

Also the fact that Sam is not tempted by the ring is itself a major story problem, and this is one instance where the films improved on the story, because Sam didn't just go "O hai here's the ring Frodo" and hand it over to him.

Anyways it's important to note that Frodo makes a choice to carry the ring, which is the ONLY requirement for being the protaganist of any story. It's got nothing to do with how capable the person might be, in fact the more capable they are the less possibility there is for conflict and tension and thus the less possibility there is for there to be an actual story. It's all about the protaganist being a person of action who makes choices that dictate how the story plays out. He is never built up as the only guy that can possibly do it, also it's no secret that Tolkien wasn't much of a novelist there's plenty of story problems in his books.

Gandalf and Galadriel don't trust themselves with the ring, because they know the power they could potentially wield by having it, but that doesn't mean that by touching it they'd go straight Sith. Also another requirement is to be found inoffensive enough to bear the ring - Boromir was all for it but no one seemed to think that'd be a good idea, and to quote Gimli from the movies "I'll be dead before I see the ring in the hands of an elf!" Frodo doesn't so much make a choice as he says something on impulse despite not knowing the gravity of the situation to stop people from arguing.

But yeah the LotR books aren't all that. Picked for fame more than anything else. 

Edit @Il Divo -

The Collectors are abducting humans because they think Shepard is super awesome for having stopped Sovereign. However, his stopping of Sovereign has already catalysed that action - they believe him dead until he shows up on Horizon and they keep collecting humans anyway. This means that Shepard is not necessary from ME2 on that count.

Secondly, you could find motivation for pretty much any human to want to stop the Collectors, seeing as they're collecting humans. TIM could tell Zaeed that the guy who made Jessie was picked up and the big goddamn hero would be all over it. Once again, Shepard is unnecessary.

Shepard not showing any plot only ability means that he is in fact completely superfluous. The game already provides leader alternatives - basically anyone who could command the fire team could take your Shepard's role. You might want to say that Shep is the glue that holds them all together, but this is only the case for a few members, and there's even an option to not even bother giving a speech. Some rousing leader.

As for finding Liara because she is Benezia's daughter and might provide some insight into her actions - say Benezia didn't have a kid. You would go around doing your thing until you hit another brick wall, at which point you would think "So... maybe we should find someone who knows stuff about the Protheans?" If Liara did provide mission critical information on Benezia or what have you then she'd be irreplaceable, but she doesn't.

The logic train goes like this:

• Shepard stops Sovereign - Harbinger and the Collectors take an interest
• Shepard is killed by the Collectors, the Collectors begin collecting humans
• TIM figures he needs someone as qualified as Shepard to stop whatever's happening to human colonies (he suspects the Collectors)
• Despite the fact that he already has two such people in his employ (Miranda and Jacob) he decides to plunge billions of credits into a project that might not actually work

The only possible argument that supports TIM's actions would be him believing that Shep's encounter with the beacons and Ilos would be useful, because everything else is standard fare. Joker and a fleet of Alliance ships shoot down Sovereign, and a party of three take out Saren - nothing spesh about Shep's abilities there. ME2 doesn't even make an allusion to this though, it just sends you on your way.

And if the Illusive Man thinks Shep is so goddamn special, why does he send him on a SUICIDE MISSION then, huh? I mean really.

Modifié par Ladi, 25 avril 2010 - 06:50 .

[irene9876]

This is a really interesting debate.  If you don't mind my putting my 2 cents in...

I thought Shepherd's necessary purpose to the ME2 story's plot is that s/he is the bait through whom TIM manipulates the Collectors.  Without Shepherd, he wouldn't have been able to lure them to Horizon.  Also, without Shepherd the Collectors wouldn't have tried to set a trap for him/her on their ship (resulting in TIM getting info on the Omega 4 relay).

We still don't know why the Collectors/Reapers want Shepherd specifically, but that is irrelevant to ME2's plot.

If Shepherd were replaced with anyone else, then TIM would be stuck going to colonys only after they have been abducted.  He might know it was them, may even have Veetor's data proof, but that's it.  And if he had chosen to place the Commander's corpse on Horizon instead as a successful lure, that still leaves the issue of the Collector ship.  The Collectors would have no reason to lay a trap for anyone else because they don't want anyone else.