123 réponses à ce sujet

[Torrential]

smudboy wrote...

"Flat characters are two-dimensional in that they are relatively uncomplicated and do not change throughout the course of a work"
It is by definition impossible for a flat character to be the protagonist of a character driven story.

Interesting but also irrelevant.

Your interpretation of who the protagonist (main character) was has nothing to do with how TIM, Shepard or the rest of the crew drive the story or not.

Quite aside from that inconsequential point you've made on who is the main character, which although I disagree with as we spend most of the game with shepard, I won't derail the topic debating as who is the main character, as it has no impact on whether this is a character driven story.

Even the most flat character can make a choice between 2 or more courses of action, they just won't inject much life into the choice or consequence (or themselves). Hell there have been so many flat main characters in literature, and film, but if we get into that we'll derail the topic very quickly.

Although you are also conveniently ignoring the fact that TIM is a character which people can have different experiences with, and so are the rest of the crew. A supposed flat character shepard can still influence things as you are behind those decisions. Imho in the renegade playthrough shepard wasn't flat anyway, especially if you are comparing him to ME1 shepard which a few people are.

smudboy wrote...

The side characters have their own plots, some their own arcs.  The Shepard character may interact with those plots, but that's as far as it goes.

As I have said perhaps a dozen times now, which again you have chosen to ignore. Shepards actions dictate whether those people live or die, which when taken within the context of this whole episode of mass effect being a suicide mission (again a fact you have not yet commented on), makes a huge impact on the story.

Further still ‘as far as it goes’, that is an interesting point really. As far as what goes, the plot? You are dismissing more than half the game with a wave of the hand, the fact is that half of the game was the game. If you are missing that point, then we are never going to see a common ground. It was the game because it was the build up to the suicide mission, which once again you have glossed over in your response.

smudboy wrote...
Loyalty is merely a gameplay mechanic for "best ending" and is totally optional.

Good I am glad I am not being hand held down a linear path that is ‘required’, long live ‘optional’ gameplay.

smudboy wrote...
What character driven choices?

Shall I repeat every single major event which happened in ME2 or will a few suffice?

Will the Quarians and the Geth go to war now? I really hope so given that I pushed them to war through tali’s problems.
Will the Krogan come back in force, I hope not as I killed every chance they had at a cure through Mordin wishes, even Mordin was killed on the final mission so bonus there!
Will Morinth be reaping victims in the next mass effect – I hope so, as I let her free of her mother and gave her free reign as a justicar! Shock horror this might not be related to the main plot! But guess what, some of us enjoy the ME universe as much as we do the linear path.
Will Cerberus be advanced by the gift of a live geth, I hope so, Miranda seemed keen to hand it over.
Will Cerberus be advanced by the gift of the perfect Korgan solider by sacrificing the Krogan warrior? This was a shepard choice I will admit, but shepard is a character as you have debated above.
After TIM’s conversation - What will Cerberus do with the collectors station, my guess make use of certain species, genetically enhancing them for the war with the reapers, possibly the keepers in particular.

If you want more examples, play the game yourself please, there are several choices shepard (we) make in the game which impact the story, these are just some of the ones that impacted me the most.

smudboy wrote...
Their motivations, save maybe Mordin, have nothing to do with the main plot.

I think you mean story, as they are part of the plot? This is a suicide mission so of course they impact the story, but I am going on and on about that, and you haven’t addressed it once, convenience?

Mordin didn’t have much to do with the main plot anyway, he was one of the weaker characters imho, I don’t even know why you are highlighting him as the main focus of the experience.

Jack, Thane, and Miranda were some of the stronger ones imho, Tali too although I don’t like her personally I can see she has a decent character depth.

smudboy wrote...

Yes, they grow into the character's plot, not the main story's plot.  There is a difference.

Not when the characters life and death is the main focus of the plot, again being a suicide mission.

smudboy wrote...
The whole point of those "Loyalty" missions was their characterization.

Not really, they didn’t gain much being loyal individually. They gained importance to character choices you made at the end, if you are interpreting loyalty as individuality you are missing the point of it.

http://www.thefreedi...ary.com/loyalty

- 2. (often plural) a feeling of allegiance
- loyalty in the face of trouble and difficulty

smudboy wrote...
The story is clear: we know what the problem is (Collectors are stealing people.)  We don't know why they're building a human Reaper.  The plot, however, is to stop them.  What does stopping the Collectors involve?  We're never told.  It's like a military commander not giving their troops necessary information to get the job done (or who their enemy is, how many, how large the campagin is, how long it'll take, etc.) assuming the mission even needs military troops, yet knowing full well there's a B52 bomber above, somewhere.  But that's okay: after we get past the Point of No Return, we should do fine.  To magically fight a land war in Asia, in space.

Where is this B52 bomber in mass effect? Nobody cares apart from your team, nobody is trying to stop them, just like ME1. The point of the entire mission, as is often stated in both games, is that you’re the only one who will go and find out, the only one with the strength and guts enough to try.

Details yes they are sketchy, but if we knew much about this ancient species, the entire council would (perhaps) finally wake up and do something, instead it is up to you the player, making for a more epic storyline.

This is a shadow agents operation, the CIA, MI5, not the regular army or even special forces, but here finally I can understand the main reason for your dislike of ME2. I disagree completely, as I enjoyed being behind enemy lines with little intel, and progressing to gradual understanding of the threat, but each to their own.

Modifié par Torrential, 16 avril 2010 - 04:53 .

[smudboy]

Flies_by_Handles wrote...

smudboy wrote...


http://social.biowar...879280/1#879280

I find the P/R system interesting, or any social reality simplified in a choice-problem solving-attitude system.

  Gah!  I expected just a little more than an ode to Tali! I joined your group but if you're a Talimancer  in clever disguise I may just leave. Joking aside, is that all that you like about the game?

The side-stories are the games' redeeming quality.  (Combat obviously, but going pewpew has to mean something to us.)  Tali has the longest, most personal, thematic one, with genuinely exciting and fun game play.  Although I'd argue even if the level design was poor, we'd still care about going pewpew.  We genuinely care what happens to her.  All the characters are likable, but some more than others for many obvious reasons.

But all need 1) plot relevance (a necessity to be there) or to be cut, 2) an arc (if they're going to bother with one, why cut out others?), 3) Motivation toward the plot (a why.).  ME2 didn't need 12 characters.  It would've helped if it followed the same formula of ME1 (characters of specific class), as well as giving such characters their ME2 class specific skills.  I could quickly compare this to FF6 and see how that's vastly superior with the game play and premise.

[smudboy]

Xpheyel wrote...
While I can agree that it makes more sense for Shepard to just nuke the place, the concept doesn't seem that contrived to me. They have no way of knowing how well defended or large the Collector homeworld/base might be. The only way to ensure victory would be to send a fleet through. Or at least a dreadnought. TIM has neither. However, they could reasonably expect to temporarily cripple the Collector's incursions by doing something like destroying their spaceports.

I understood the mission to be military/spec ops.  Meaning, intel, intel, and more intel.  Which was luckily covered by TIM, but he didn't really give us what was needed.

There were simpler, more logical ways of gaining intel.  For example, if our ship can house probes, why can't it house satellites?  We'd be dropping satellites off in every solar system, seeing where our enemy Cruiser is.  Or camping the Omega-4 relay.  Or setting up mass effect comm buoys once a IFF is working.  Or setting up a trap/mine field.

Sending a fleet in through the Omega-4 wouldn't ensure victory, since no one knows what's past there.

Similarly Ilos turns out to be a ground mission where you can luckily drive a tank through a mass relay. Wrex is a random guy in ME1, double if you go straight from Garrus to Chora's Den and skip recruiting Wrex until you bump into him at the elevator. Tali is an chick from a race which isn't widely trusted or accepted who happens to have a recording of Saren gloating darkly acquired in a way that some of the other characters seem to believe is impossible... But her evidence is instantly accepted and Shepard puts her on the squad, not to mention dragging Liara to a potential gun fight with her mother (nice for the story but totally, totally insane).

Ilos was about finding the Conduit, on a known planet, in a known solar system, amongst some known though undiscovered Prothean ruins.

Wrex is a random guy, but he personally knew Saren, and wants him dead.

Tali provides a plot device, and is exposition on the main opposing force.  She was trying to get away from Saren by making a deal with the Shadow Broker, by giving him the evidence so he could give her a place to hide.  After being saved by Shepard after being lied to by Fist's men, she decides to trust him.

Liara is even more involved in the plot for being a Prothean researcher, having a mother who's an enemy, used as a plot (navigator) device to read Shepard's visions (brain map).  She's also thankful for being saved and interested in Shepard on a few levels.

You can cast elements from either game as being contrived or just plain crazy if you want to take the time to bother. You can also probably come up with justifications for either. 

Many things in stories are contrived, but provided they have necessary reasons, foreshadowing or comments in the narrative for their existence, and we're shown/told these things (and explained/shown why other reasons don't connect), it works.  Which is why the story in ME2 works.  It's not altogether good nor bad.  (For example, cheating death is ridiculously crazy, but it works.) The plot is what suffers the most, as the string of logic connecting things together is ridiculous, amidst the plot holes, retcons, replaceable characters, and the passive and replaceable protagonist character.

[smudboy]

[quote]Torrential wrote...
Interesting but also irrelevant.
[/quote]
...
[quote]
Quite aside from that inconsequential point you've made on who is the main character, which although I disagree with as we spend most of the game with shepard, I won't derail the topic debating as who is the main character, as it has no impact on whether this is a character driven story.
[/quote]
It's not a character driven story, chief.
[quote]
Even the most flat character can make a choice between 2 or more courses of action, they just won't inject much life into the choice or consequence (or themselves). Hell there have been so many flat main characters in literature, and film, but if we get into that we'll derail the topic very quickly.
[/quote]
So you want to read a character driven story by some person who does nothing, has no opinion that changes, comes across conflict, isn't bothered by it, ad nauseum?

Be my guest.
[quote]
Although you are also conveniently ignoring the fact that TIM is a character which people can have different experiences with, and so are the rest of the crew. A supposed flat character shepard can still influence things as you are behind those decisions. Imho in the renegade playthrough shepard wasn't flat anyway, especially if you are comparing him to ME1 shepard which a few people are.
[/quote]
Shepard is by nature a flat and static character.  If they do not change, grow, have an arc, or be integral to the story, then there's no reason to have them as the protagonist.

[quote]
As I have said perhaps a dozen times now, which again you have chosen to ignore. Shepards actions dictate whether those people live or die, which when taken within the context of this whole episode of mass effect being a suicide mission (again a fact you have not yet commented on), makes a huge impact on the story.
[/quote]
So?  The plot of ME2 will go on just fine.
[quote]
Further still ‘as far as it goes’, that is an interesting point really. As far as what goes, the plot? You are dismissing more than half the game with a wave of the hand, the fact is that half of the game was the game. If you are missing that point, then we are never going to see a common ground. It was the game because it was the build up to the suicide mission, which once again you have glossed over in your response.
[/quote]
What?
[quote]
Good I am glad I am not being hand held down a linear path that is ‘required’, long live ‘optional’ gameplay.
[/quote]
Unfortunately, all stories are liner.
[quote]
Will the Quarians and the Geth go to war now? I really hope so given that I pushed them to war through tali’s problems.
Will the Krogan come back in force, I hope not as I killed every chance they had at a cure through Mordin wishes, even Mordin was killed on the final mission so bonus there!
Will Morinth be reaping victims in the next mass effect – I hope so, as I let her free of her mother and gave her free reign as a justicar! Shock horror this might not be related to the main plot! But guess what, some of us enjoy the ME universe as much as we do the linear path.
Will Cerberus be advanced by the gift of a live geth, I hope so, Miranda seemed keen to hand it over.
Will Cerberus be advanced by the gift of the perfect Korgan solider by sacrificing the Krogan warrior? This was a shepard choice I will admit, but shepard is a character as you have debated above.
After TIM’s conversation - What will Cerberus do with the collectors station, my guess make use of certain species, genetically enhancing them for the war with the reapers, possibly the keepers in particular.
[/quote]
Nothing to do with the plot of ME2.
[quote]
If you want more examples, play the game yourself please, there are several choices shepard (we) make in the game which impact the story, these are just some of the ones that impacted me the most.
[/quote]
There are two main plot specific choices:
1) Turn Legion on/sell them
2) Keep/Save the Collector base

[quote]
I think you mean story, as they are part of the plot? This is a suicide mission so of course they impact the story, but I am going on and on about that, and you haven’t addressed it once, convenience?
[/quote]
I'm quite aware of the motivations and involvement of each character in the main plot.  See the first link in my sig.

[quote]
Mordin didn’t have much to do with the main plot anyway, he was one of the weaker characters imho, I don’t even know why you are highlighting him as the main focus of the experience.
[/quote]
Mordin got an intro by TIM and Miranda.  Without his countermeasure, the plot could not continue.  He's the only vital character in the entire game.
[quote]
Jack, Thane, and Miranda were some of the stronger ones imho, Tali too although I don’t like her personally I can see she has a decent character depth.
[/quote]
They were all fluff.  Colorful interesting fluff, but fluff.
[quote]
Not really, they didn’t gain much being loyal individually. They gained importance to character choices you made at the end, if you are interpreting loyalty as individuality you are missing the point of it.
- 2. (often plural) a feeling of allegiance
- loyalty in the face of trouble and difficulty
[/quote]
All of which are optional.
The concept, theme or lexicon definitoin of loyalty is not addressed in the Suicide Mission anywhere, only a nonsensical game play mechanic, where one character is bulletproof, one may/may not get hit with a rocket, and one may not be able to hold a biotic bubble in place.  How is loyalty to Shepard, or the mission, cause these events to occur?  We don't know or understand the causal relationship between "a feeling of allegiance" to "bulletproof armor."
[quote]
Where is this B52 bomber in mass effect? Nobody cares apart from your team, nobody is trying to stop them, just like ME1. The point of the entire mission, as is often stated in both games, is that you’re the only one who will go and find out, the only one with the strength and guts enough to try.
[/quote]
The B52 analogy = Collector Cruiser.  The only known thing about the goal of the plot.
[quote]
Details yes they are sketchy, but if we knew much about this ancient species, the entire council would (perhaps) finally wake up and do something, instead it is up to you the player, making for a more epic storyline.
[/quote]
Fancy that.  Too bad we couldn't show them the Collector Cruiser, or why we didn't just blast it to pieces.  Or show them Disabled Reaper.

Modifié par smudboy, 16 avril 2010 - 05:28 .

[Nightwriter]

KnotEngaged wrote...

OP makes some nice points. Unfortunately this thread will now be flamed by idiots that don't understand how a trilogy with a serialized narrative structure works, and the challenges it presents.

It is sad. When anyone at all remotely questions the story, it MUST be that they simply do not understand it as well as certain superior others.

[JMA22TB]

After breaking it down I have put up a thread that I think may explain some of the issues with the main story and the Collectors check it out :happy:

Modifié par JMA22TB, 16 avril 2010 - 05:46 .

[smudboy]

Nightwriter wrote...

KnotEngaged wrote...

OP makes some nice points. Unfortunately this thread will now be flamed by idiots that don't understand how a trilogy with a serialized narrative structure works, and the challenges it presents.

It is sad. When anyone at all remotely questions the story, it MUST be that they simply do not understand it as well as certain superior others.

So he's aware there is a challenge in writing a serialized narrative...and can't see the storytelling mistakes?  Or he can, and forgives them because it's challenging?

I'm going to go run around outside...wee...!

[smudboy]

JMA22TB wrote...

After breaking it down I have put up a thread that I think may explain some of the issues with the main story and the Collectors check it out :happy:

JMA22TB, I love you like the mad writer you are.  But you even out do me.

I'll just nod and agree to everything.

[Xpheyel]

smudboy wrote...

I understood the mission to be military/spec ops.  Meaning, intel, intel, and more intel.  Which was luckily covered by TIM, but he didn't really give us what was needed.

There were simpler, more logical ways of gaining intel.  For example, if our ship can house probes, why can't it house satellites?  We'd be dropping satellites off in every solar system, seeing where our enemy Cruiser is.  Or camping the Omega-4 relay.  Or setting up mass effect comm buoys once a IFF is working.  Or setting up a trap/mine field.

Sending a fleet in through the Omega-4 wouldn't ensure victory, since no one knows what's past there.

Actually I don't think you can camp or mine the far side of a Relay for incoming ships IIRC, the drift is too severe, covers too great a volume of space.  

And Ok, give a reasonably high degree of belief of victory. As you say, the only thing seen is a Cruiser. They COULD have 50 Dreadnoughts in orbit around their home planet; presumptively the resources required would necessitate a large enough space empire that they would be more visible. 

smudboy wrote...
Ilos was about finding the Conduit, on a known planet, in a known solar system, amongst some known though undiscovered Prothean ruins.

Wrex is a random guy, but he personally knew Saren, and wants him dead.

Tali provides a plot device, and is exposition on the main opposing force.  She was trying to get away from Saren by making a deal with the Shadow Broker, by giving him the evidence so he could give her a place to hide.  After being saved by Shepard after being lied to by Fist's men, she decides to trust him.

Liara is even more involved in the plot for being a Prothean researcher, having a mother who's an enemy, used as a plot (navigator) device to read Shepard's visions (brain map).  She's also thankful for being saved and interested in Shepard on a few levels.

Missing the point, why is Shepard dragging Wrex along? Why does he trust Tali (and why does ANYONE believe her sketchy evidence)? Why doesn't he leave Liara on the Normandy and have her talk to her mom on the vid? Why can't you recruit Alliance personal to roughly cover their skill sets?  

Answer? "Shepard: I'll take all the help I can get." Because it's their outlines on the character selection, and its a Bioware game. So you recruit a skilled band of misfits to save the Galaxy that conveniently have something important to do or say, mostly on the first planet, and then tag along for the rest of the game like Canderous and Mission in KOTOR.

Now, do I have a big problem with this myself? Not really. I have a problem with what seems to be an uneven degree of pedantic over-analysis between ME1 and ME2. To the point where to me, you have to ignore a heck of a lot more to justify bringing a Krogan hitman who was just after some tertiary NPC at the behest of an information broker than to justify why you're bringing powerful biotics even if you have no idea if you'll need biotics. 

The narrative would hardly be hurt if you had more information about the collector base beforehand, sure. Though it hardly is at the top of my list that every Chekhov's Gun fire. I could understand dragging Samara and Jack along even if you didn't end up needing a biotic barrier. 

Modifié par Xpheyel, 16 avril 2010 - 06:03 .

[Torrential]

[quote]smudboy wrote...
It's not a character driven story, chief.
[/quote]

You can say that a thousand times but from my perspective the characters very lives, and often families in your hands makes it so. It if shepard didn’t shape those around him frankly I wouldn't of enjoyed it, as that is the only kind of film and game I enjoy, characters shaping the experience.

[quote]smudboy wrote...
So you want to read a character driven story by some person who does nothing, has no opinion that changes, comes across conflict, isn't bothered by it, ad nauseum?

Be my guest.
[/quote]

No, but inventing strawmen into an argument does nothing for it.

It is critical here how you don’t refute the point that the flattest of characters can make a choice that influences a story, that was the point. As I said above, I think shepard was anything but flat, but my opinion is irrelevant in answer to the relevant point, which you so conveniently fail to address.


[quote]smudboy wrote...
Shepard is by nature a flat and static character.  If they do not change, grow, have an arc, or be integral to the story, then there's no reason to have them as the protagonist.
[/quote]

You are clutching at straws again now; I am not here to debate how shepard develops or doesn’t develop, or even if they are the main character or not. Your reference to static however implies no choices, which clearly we do have during our experience of the story.

[quote]smudboy wrote...
So?  The plot of ME2 will go on just fine.

[/quote]

What is your definition of fine? Half the team dead, everyone dead, all those people you spent 30 – 40 hours getting to know wiped out in the blink of an eye? I played a renegade, and still some of those characters I’d miss in the next game.

[quote]smudboy wrote...
What?
[/quote]
I am not sure if I can clarify further, let me see.

Dismissing half of the story by stating:

[quote]smudboy wrote...
The Shepard character may interact with those plots, but that's as far as it goes.
[/quote]

‘As far as it goes’ we interacted with the collectors, TIM, Omega, and the Normandy, but I won’t dismiss their impact out of hand either, as they were part of the story.

No instead, shepard (you) decides what happens in them, and hence the game.

[quote]smudboy wrote...
Unfortunately, all stories are liner.
[/quote]

Fortunately not in an RPG or even an MMO these days, thank goodness as we dictate their outcome.

See the sandbox vs theme park debate  (MMO)
Or even the Oblivion vs NWN debate  (RPG) for further information

[quote]smudboy wrote...
Nothing to do with the plot of ME2.
[/quote]

I didn’t state they had anything to do with the main arc initially, but I will now.

The Geth do.
The Krogan do.
Cerberus does.
Should I go on?

[quote]smudboy wrote...
There are two main plot specific choices:
1) Turn Legion on/sell them
2) Keep/Save the Collector base
[/quote]

They are endgame choices, important certainly but again you are dismissing more than half the game in a wave of the hand.

[quote]smudboy wrote...
Mordin got an intro by TIM and Miranda.  Without his countermeasure, the plot could not continue.  He's the only vital character in the entire game.
[/quote]

Ah now were on vital, not who is important to the story, excellent more specific.

So I guess Miranda and TIM were not essential then, oh wait Miranda led the project to keep us alive, and TIM helped run the entire game.

How about a biotic for getting through the swarms?

How about a tech for disabling the door from the vents?

How about every single character who made the ship upgrades possible, and meant we came back alive.

How about the fire team leaders who made the distractions, and assaults possible?

How about every single character who fought in the suicide mission to make sure you came back alive, without them you’re a corpse.

I’d say Jacob getting us out of the first mission was fairly essential.

If you want essential throughout the game, your leaning again for linear. A freeform game cannot be freeform if it requires too many characters doing specific jobs; I am glad for the freedom nature of ME2 and I hope for more options, not less.

[quote]smudboy wrote...
They were all fluff.  Colorful interesting fluff, but fluff.
[/quote]

No they were the game for me, as I enjoy characters more than any plot.

[quote]smudboy wrote...
All of which are optional.
We don't know or understand the causal relationship between "a feeling of allegiance" to "bulletproof armor."
[/quote]

I did, it meant the people under my command were coming back alive because they gave a damn and had something left to live for.

[quote]smudboy wrote...
Fancy that.  Too bad we couldn't show them the Collector Cruiser, or why we didn't just blast it to pieces.  Or show them Disabled Reaper.
[/quote]

No difference to ME1, they would have been stubborn just the same, ignoring the fact it was a galactic threat and considering it a collector/geth threat instead, the council are a waste of space imho.

Modifié par Torrential, 16 avril 2010 - 06:16 .

[JMA22TB]

smudboy wrote...

JMA22TB wrote...

After breaking it down I have put up a thread that I think may explain some of the issues with the main story and the Collectors check it out :happy:

JMA22TB, I love you like the mad writer you are.  But you even out do me.

I'll just nod and agree to everything.

lol, I'm converting...slowly. Over time, though, it's just hard to accept the possibility that the 'super villains' had such a poorly defended base and didn't deploy another Reaper ally that all they'd have to say is "Don't worry your Gods are going to return to save you"

[smudboy]

[quote]Torrential wrote...
You can say that a thousand times but from my perspective the characters very lives, and often families in your hands makes it so. It if shepard didn’t shape those around him frankly I wouldn't of enjoyed it, as that is the only kind of film and game I enjoy, characters shaping the experience.
[/quote]
Explain how the the main plot of ME2 is a character driven story.
[quote]
No, but inventing strawmen into an argument does nothing for it.
[/quote]
Um...
[quote]
It is critical here how you don’t refute the point that the flattest of characters can make a choice that influences a story, that was the point. As I said above, I think shepard was anything but flat, but my opinion is irrelevant in answer to the relevant point, which you so conveniently fail to address.
[/quote]
Many characters can make a choice that influence a story.  I'm saying a static/flat character, who is the lead character in a character driven story, that is, theirs, is not a good story by definition of what a static/flat character and character driven story do.  It barely works in a short story because there's no time to develop the character, unless that's all the story is about.  And the writer knows how to tell a short, punchy, quickly expositioned character.  None of these things exist in ME2.
[quote]
You are clutching at straws again now; I am not here to debate how shepard develops or doesn’t develop, or even if they are the main character or not. Your reference to static however implies no choices, which clearly we do have during our experience of the story.
[/quote]
The only way Shepard makes choices is by virtue of the player, not their character.  Any player controlled operation is a walking plot device.
[quote]
What is your definition of fine? Half the team dead, everyone dead, all those people you spent 30 – 40 hours getting to know wiped out in the blink of an eye? I played a renegade, and still some of those characters I’d miss in the next game.
[/quote]
So?
[quote]
[quote]
The Shepard character may interact with those plots, but that's as far as it goes.
[/quote]
‘As far as it goes’ we interacted with the collectors, TIM, Omega, and the Normandy, but I won’t dismiss their impact out of hand either, as they were part of the story.

No instead, shepard (you) decides what happens in them, and hence the game.
[/quote]
You do realize I was referring to the side-characters stories, and how Shepard doesn't change at all from interacting with those stories.  Only the side-characters do.  It doesn't matter what happens to these characters, unless they have bearing on the plot.  If existence makes the plot continue, then their use is finished.  Whether they live or die is inconsequential to it.
[quote]
I didn’t state they had anything to do with the main arc initially, but I will now.

The Geth do.
The Krogan do.
Cerberus does.
Should I go on?
[/quote]
Please.  Don't.
[quote]
[quote]smudboy wrote...
There are two main plot specific choices:
1) Turn Legion on/sell them
2) Keep/Save the Collector base
[/quote]

They are endgame choices, important certainly but again you are dismissing more than half the game in a wave of the hand.
[/quote]
No, these are in fact the only main plot related choices.  I'm not dismissing anything.
[quote]
Ah now were on vital, not who is important to the story, excellent more specific.

So I guess Miranda and TIM were not essential then, oh wait Miranda led the project to keep us alive, and TIM helped run the entire game.

How about a biotic for getting through the swarms?
How about a tech for disabling the door from the vents?
How about every single character who made the ship upgrades possible, and meant we came back alive.
How about the fire team leaders who made the distractions, and assaults possible?
How about every single character who fought in the suicide mission to make sure you came back alive, without them you’re a corpse.
[/quote]
TIM/Miranda's reasons for bringing Shepard back are vital to his existence.  After that, they, and everyone else save Mordin become replaceable to the plot (although you could argue Mordin is replaceable by only his assistant.)

[quote]
No they were the game for me, as I enjoy characters more than any plot.
[/quote]
So you admit you enjoyed the characters more than the main plot?

[quote]
[quote]smudboy wrote...
All of which are optional.
We don't know or understand the causal relationship between "a feeling of allegiance" to "bulletproof armor."
[/quote]

I did, it meant the people under my command were coming back alive because they gave a damn and had something left to live for.
[/quote]
No, no you didn't.  You, me, anyone: we can't comprehend, how "a feeling of allegiance" equates to "bulletproof armor." It's completely nonsensical.  Warm fuzzy feelings do not suddenly make one bulletproof, or have a causal relationship to getting a tech exper a rocket to the head, etc.

[smudboy]

Xpheyel wrote...
Actually I don't think you can camp or mine the far side of a Relay for incoming ships IIRC, the drift is too severe, covers too great a volume of space.  

And Ok, give a reasonably high degree of belief of victory. As you say, the only thing seen is a Cruiser. They COULD have 50 Dreadnoughts in orbit around their home planet; presumptively the resources required would necessitate a large enough space empire that they would be more visible. 

Right, but the idea is that the relays teleport you to known solar systems where other relays are, and that's all part of the CIC map.  This could've been a simple game play mechanic, would give a fake sense of "real-time" to exploration (EDI: "Our network has detected an unknown ship in this area."), and would be guaranteed to be more interesting than mineral scanning.

The plot isn't all about victory per se, although that would be a good outcome.  It's more about knowing what's going on.  Again, I make the comparison to Guns of Navarone.  We know what the goal is (destroy the Guns of Navarone.)  Additionally, becaue the species is 50k years old, they could have entire networks of solar systems and planets with a massive fleet.  We simply don't know any details, and we should.  I mean, their Cruiser is about the size of Sovereign: what the heck kind of dreadnought would they have?

Missing the point, why is Shepard dragging Wrex along? Why does he trust Tali (and why does ANYONE believe her sketchy evidence)? Why doesn't he leave Liara on the Normandy and have her talk to her mom on the vid? Why can't you recruit Alliance personal to roughly cover their skill sets?  

Wrex is not plot vital.  Tali and Liara are.

Answer? "Shepard: I'll take all the help I can get." Because it's their outlines on the character selection, and its a Bioware game. So you recruit a skilled band of misfits to save the Galaxy that conveniently have something important to do or say, mostly on the first planet, and then tag along for the rest of the game like Canderous and Mission in KOTOR.

The "because they're part of the game" argument.  Okay then.

Now, do I have a big problem with this myself? Not really. I have a problem with what seems to be an uneven degree of pedantic over-analysis between ME1 and ME2. To the point where to me, you have to ignore a heck of a lot more to justify bringing a Krogan hitman who was just after some tertiary NPC at the behest of an information broker than to justify why you're bringing powerful biotics even if you have no idea if you'll need biotics. 

In ME1, we meet with people as we run around the Citadel trying to get evidence on Saren, and we bring them along.  In the process we get Specre status and a ship (authority and ability to continue the plot.)
In ME2, we have a specific goal, with a specific set of people to pick up, but (save Mordin) we don't know why.  Whereas ME1 characters had one or many motivations to join (hunt down and stop Saren), ME2 has either no reasons, or reasons not related to the plot.  The only value I can see in these people is after recruitment, TIM progresses the plot.

Edit: Additionally, all TIM/Miranda/anyone had to do was introduce the characters and give us a reason to get them.  For instance,
TIM:"I think you should pick up a asari Justicar named Samara."
Shepard: "What the hell for?  Miranda and Jacob are biotics."
TIM: "Biotics are the future, for humanity, for all sentient life.  You never know when having a powerful ally can protect you when you least expect it."
TIM: "However, they have a strict moral code.  It would be difficult to have them join Cerberus, but you're a natural leader.  You'll have to remind her of the injustice the Collectors, blahblahblah..."

This could work.  TIM could be subtley foreshadowing what might happen past the Omega-4 relay, whether he knows what's past there and it's all one giant plot of his, or if he doesn't even know.  If there are some plot scenes where Samara does infact protect you pre-Omega-4, great.  Some characters need to be woven into the narrative slowly and grow organically, not all of them static.  The dossier-loyalty-formula came across as very odd.

The narrative would hardly be hurt if you had more information about the collector base beforehand, sure. Though it hardly is at the top of my list that every Chekhov's Gun fire. I could understand dragging Samara and Jack along even if you didn't end up needing a biotic barrier. 

Then that is where we differ greatly: don't introduce a storytelling element if you're not going to use it properly.  This is why there is the usually difficult process of editing.  Additionally, if the goal of the plot is not developed or clarified as the plot progresses, you'd have to explain why that is, or provide a darned good reason for why the plot went the way it did and couldn't go in the most simple, most logical way.

Would you rather have a story that's long, slow and where things don't make sense?  Okay.  (I tend to fall asleep at movies and books like that.)  I prefer stories to be, short, concise, and punchy, where every bit of the narrative is clear, and means something.  But that's just me.

Modifié par smudboy, 16 avril 2010 - 07:56 .

[Nightwriter]

I've lost track of the argument. I want a summary.



Is this still a Torrential/smudboy, pro-ME2 storyline/anti-ME2 storyline discussion?

[smudboy]

Nightwriter wrote...

I've lost track of the argument. I want a summary.

Is this still a Torrential/smudboy, pro-ME2 storyline/anti-ME2 storyline discussion?

I think so.  I'm still waiting for Zulu's cat link.

TIM totally needs to be stroking a cat in ME3.  Zulu knows.

[Terraneaux]

smudboy wrote...

I think so.  I'm still waiting for Zulu's cat link.

TIM totally needs to be stroking a cat in ME3.  Zulu knows.

If by cat you mean 'unmarked grave', and by stroking you mean 'inside of,' then yes, I agree with you.

[Nightwriter]

smudboy wrote...

Nightwriter wrote...

I've lost track of the argument. I want a summary.

Is this still a Torrential/smudboy, pro-ME2 storyline/anti-ME2 storyline discussion?

I think so.  I'm still waiting for Zulu's cat link.

TIM totally needs to be stroking a cat in ME3.  Zulu knows.

This is someone's cue to photoshop the Illusive Man's head onto an image of Dr. Evil stroking Mr. Bigglesworth.

And I'm still on the I-question-the-storyline-of-ME2 side of the argument!

[Onyx Jaguar]

http://social.biowar...index/1995545/1



Please, by now you guys have to know that Zulu and I are the same person, except I am Paragon and like ME 2.

[Nightwriter]

That freaking link is haunting these forums. HAUNTING THEM.

[Onyx Jaguar]

I have all the greatest hits

http://social.biowar...5/index/1449583
http://social.biowar...5/index/1600890
http://social.biowar...5/index/1968299
http://social.biowar...5/index/1748674
http://social.biowar...5/index/1988878
http://social.biowar...5/index/2267863

Oh yeah

/end hijack

Modifié par Onyx Jaguar, 16 avril 2010 - 10:00 .

[Nightwriter]

*wonders if Onyx Jaguar is another account of Zulu's*

*pauses*

*wonders if she is becoming paranoid*

*pauses*

*... wonders if they just want her to THINK she is becoming paranoid...*

[tonnactus]

BaladasDemnevanni wrote...


Hmm, this I have to disagree with. TIM leading me around did not feel any different from the Council in the first game. It all came down to "Event x is happening here. We need you to do this, this, and this." Shepard: "Ok." Rinse and repeat.

Is this a joke,or what???

Mass Effect /Captain Anderson: You are a spectre know.You dont owe us accountability.

Noveria first,or therum,or Ferros,vice versa. Shepardt had a lot of freedom.And wasnt a dumb puppet of the illusive man.

Modifié par tonnactus, 16 avril 2010 - 10:33 .

[Nightwriter]

I agree, tonnactus. I felt like Anderson and the Council gave me a lot more freedom than the Illusive Man.



The Illusive Man gave me missions and tasks, but the Council gave me leads.

[tonnactus]

FlintlockJazz wrote...
 I like the recruitment missions and more character driven story in ME2.

Oh yes, the recruitment missions.Kill dozen of mercs on the way to speak with the people you want to recruit.Just great.Otherwise,like with kazumi and zaeed,it makes a lot more sense.