374 réponses à ce sujet

[smudboy]

AmstradHero wrote...

Ah, how skillful. You've managed to cherry-pick bits and pieces out of interviews and promotional materials and gameplay bits that supposedly prove how inaccurate the promotional material is.
1) Promotional material always exaggerates to some degree the content of a game/movie/book/product/whatever. Deal with it.
2) Some of the "errors" you've pointed out are laughably weak and in other cases blatantly inaccurate.

I don't disagree that you have a couple of points here and there... but on the whole, I'm going to go with the following (number modified) quote:
"Yeah, I think somebody owes me the last ten minutes of my life back."

Thanks.  I consider myself quite skilled.

1) I did deal with it.  Not that it was bothering me.  I just thought I'd be fun to do.  Apparently you didn't think so.  This makes me cry tears of great sadness.  Or something.
2) Some?  Not all?  Two or three?  Veeech.

Oh.  Some are good, some are bad.  (Drugs drugs drugs.)

I owe you nothing.  Except more comedy.  Which I guess translates to you wanting your time and life back.  This is acceptable to me.

[SkullandBonesmember]

InvaderErl wrote...

Hey, I'm always up for more dialogue. I hated how nobody in ME1 talked during the meetings aside from Kaiden/Liara/Ashley. I think I heard Garrus or Tali speak up once maybe?

Fact is they were still there. You could still chat it up with all your crew after every main mission. You could still drop in on Anderson and Udina after every main mission. You could be diplomatic OR an ass to the Council. In ME2 almost all dialogue is limited to the battlefield. Woohoo. Face it, when compared side by side, AS IT SHOULD BE since ME2 is a SEQUEL, regardless of whether or not it's a "stand alone game", there was still more character interaction in ME1.

[SkullandBonesmember]

InvaderErl wrote...

Its the old, "SHOOTERZ r FOR TEH STUPID PEOPLZ" argument.

No. Shooters aren't for "stupid people". I play Grand Theft Auto when I feel a need for 'SPLOSHUNS. But when playing a Bioware title, I expect, as a result of their infamous reputation for quality RPGs, to be presented with epic characters, character interaction, and epic story telling. Combat is pretty low on my list for what I look for in a game from Bioware.

Modifié par SkullandBonesmember, 12 juin 2010 - 12:58 .

[RyuGuitarFreak]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

Hey, I'm always up for more dialogue. I hated how nobody in ME1 talked during the meetings aside from Kaiden/Liara/Ashley. I think I heard Garrus or Tali speak up once maybe?

Fact is they were still there. You could still chat it up with all your crew after every main mission. You could still drop in on Anderson and Udina after every main mission. You could be diplomatic OR an ass to the Council. In ME2 almost all dialogue is limited to the battlefield. Woohoo. Face it, when compared side by side, AS IT SHOULD BE since ME2 is a SEQUEL, regardless of whether or not it's a "stand alone game", there was still more character interaction in ME1.

*Facepalm. Seriously, sometimes I just wanna bury my face in shame to some posts here. You forget that ME2 brings 4 more squadmates, each one them having one mission tied up to their story, I won't count Zaeed and Kasumi. In ME1 you also sidequests to squadmantes, but besides Garrus's, the other felt really random. Also, Ash and Kaidan don't have sidequests except their romance. You also forget that ME2 squadmates have much more lines of dialogue than ME1.
Well, replace your "council" situation with TIM, same can be said about being diplomatic or an ass/bad ass (renegade options).
Then you have the crew on SR-2. Joker makes comments about the plot missions and also has a comment for every squadmate around. I don't think Kelly's interactions and possibilities with Shepard really need to be explained. Then you have the engineer's, Chakwa's and the cooking guy sidequests and dialogue which brought Shep (and myself watching that) much closer to the crew then ME1 ever did. Talking about the engineer's, I loved their funny comments about squadmates. Also, there's EDI, the AI that's everywhere on Normandy that can give you an explanation for every part of the ship.
So, "yeah", ME1 had more character interaction.
Sarcasm aside, this is highly debateable.

Modifié par RyuGuitarFreak, 12 juin 2010 - 03:00 .

[Teknor]

NewMessageN00b wrote...

I'd rephrase that: "SHOOTERZ r FOR TEH PEOPLZ WH0 FIIL STUP3D".
While all people have dumb-attacks from time to time, stupid people never get out of them.

You need to be specially *cough* wired to like shooting for longer than an hour or even less.

You need to be even more "wired" to relate shooting with stupidity.

[InvaderErl]

NewMessageN00b wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

Teknor wrote...

His hatred for shooter crowd clouds his judgement. Sad.

Its the old, "SHOOTERZ r FOR TEH STUPID PEOPLZ" argument.

Okay, thank you - I will go back to playing Bioshock now.

I'd rephrase that: "SHOOTERZ r FOR TEH PEOPLZ WH0 FIIL STUP3D".
While all people have dumb-attacks from time to time, stupid people never get out of them.

You need to be specially *cough* wired to like shooting for longer than an hour or even less.

Why is it THIS is the face I see when I imagine the poster behind this amazing little addition:

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

Hey,
I'm always up for more dialogue. I hated how nobody in ME1 talked
during the meetings aside from Kaiden/Liara/Ashley. I think I heard
Garrus or Tali speak up once maybe?

Fact is they were
still there. You could still chat it up with all your crew after every
main mission. You could still drop in on Anderson and Udina after every
main mission. You could be diplomatic OR an ass to the Council. In ME2
almost all dialogue is limited to the battlefield. Woohoo. Face it, when
compared side by side, AS IT SHOULD BE since ME2 is a SEQUEL,
regardless of whether or not it's a "stand alone game", there was still
more character interaction in ME1.

Your argument is literally changing with every post, its all over the place.

Modifié par InvaderErl, 12 juin 2010 - 06:12 .

[implodinggoat]

Good video and it definitely makes some good points.

Overall, I think ME2 is a better game than ME1 almost entirely on the strength of the improved combat system; but it definitely took major steps backward in terms of story, choice and customization.

In ME1, I never felt like the game was forcing me to make decisions that I wouldn't make, while in ME2 I frequently feel like the game is forcing me down a path that I don't want to go down and one which I can easily think my way around (Biggest example the Council and the Alliance want to cover up the Collector abductions; but I could easily force their hand since I have proof of said abductions that I could easily take to the press and thus free myself from being the Illusive Man's errand boy).

In ME1, I was given intelligence and then sent to pursue it on my terms. In ME2 I run around and do whatever the Illusive Man tells me (at one point, I object that we need to inform the Alliance about the imminent attack on Horizon and when he says, "No I don't want them getting their first." Rather than saying "**** You." and just signaling the Alliance myself, I just accept it and thus place doing what a terrorist organization tells me to do above the lives of thousands of colonists).

Additionally the interesting ethical questions posed by weighing the Idealist Deontological Paragaon approach against the more Ruthless Utilitarian Renegade approach are abandoned in ME2 and replaced with a simple choice between...

Paragon: Be the Illusive Man's unwilling puppet; but still doing everything he wants up until the final decision at the end of the game. Or...

Renegade: Be the Illusive Man's willing puppet and doing everything he wants.

So, the sense of freedom ME1 gave me is killed in the name of making me work for a bunch of terrorist ****s who I had hoped I would be able to systematically hunt down and execute in ME2.

Add to that the fact that they stripped out all my RPG style weapon customization and a lot of my squad customization and the unholy act of butchery they committed on Liara's character and I definitely had major disappointments in ME2.

Still, even though the story was weak compared to the epic storyline in ME1 the dialogue (except for the horrors imposed on Liara) is well written and is actually delivered better than in ME1 since they took steps to make the dialogue more cinematic. Additionally, while the main storyline is weak the side plots help compensate since they are mostly quite exceptional. 3 missions which have nothing to do with the weak main story provided the best combat in the whole game (Tali's recruitment), provided the most ethical substance (Mordin's loyalty mission) and the best writing (Tali's loyalty mission).

Due to its superior story Mass Effect 1 is the game I'll be nostalgic about years from now; but if I'm sitting down to play a game today Mass Effect 2 wins hands down. Its just more fun than ME1, even though that fun comes at the cost of a storyline that continually pisses me off.

Modifié par implodinggoat, 12 juin 2010 - 06:29 .

[implodinggoat]

NewMessageN00b wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

Teknor wrote...

His hatred for shooter crowd clouds his judgement. Sad.

Its the old, "SHOOTERZ r FOR TEH STUPID PEOPLZ" argument.

Okay, thank you - I will go back to playing Bioshock now.

I'd rephrase that: "SHOOTERZ r FOR TEH PEOPLZ WH0 FIIL STUP3D".
While all people have dumb-attacks from time to time, stupid people never get out of them.

You need to be specially *cough* wired to like shooting for longer than an hour or even less.

I enjoy shooters, and I'm currently writing a book that attempts to create an objective ethical system which is justified entirely by means of the logical consequences of the subjective valuations of individual rational beings (which we may obviously confirm A Posteriori).

Did you superior *cough* intellect catch all that? Or did your comprehension cease after "I enjoy shooters"?

Point being you lack the evidence to make such generalizations and you really shouldn't go around flaunting one's intellect on the internet as it makes you sound like a Jackass.  For example look at that first sentence I wrote, all of that is true; but I defy you to read it without reaching the conclusion that I'm a smug self absordbed jackass.

Modifié par implodinggoat, 12 juin 2010 - 07:14 .

[Bryy_Miller]

mashavasilec wrote...

 Wow, people now suggest Bioware give them an apology. That thread is hilarious beyond measure.

Welcome to an official video game developer's forum.

[FourSixEight]

smudboy wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...

Ah, how skillful. You've managed to cherry-pick bits and pieces out of interviews and promotional materials and gameplay bits that supposedly prove how inaccurate the promotional material is.
1) Promotional material always exaggerates to some degree the content of a game/movie/book/product/whatever. Deal with it.
2) Some of the "errors" you've pointed out are laughably weak and in other cases blatantly inaccurate.

I don't disagree that you have a couple of points here and there... but on the whole, I'm going to go with the following (number modified) quote:
"Yeah, I think somebody owes me the last ten minutes of my life back."

Thanks.  I consider myself quite skilled.

[snip]

I owe you nothing.  Except more comedy.  Which I guess translates to you wanting your time and life back.  This is acceptable to me.

Translation: "I did it for the lulz."

[jkstexas2001]

Well, I agree - ammo types should not fall under the power category. I mean, in the real world, changing from fmj to hollow point rounds is as simple as changing a magazine you've loaded with the alternate round. That concept was not well thought out. Powers should be "skills" - skills are not required in changing ammo types. I think that idea was not thought out at all. I like the skills as they were in ME1 for the most part - all associated with individual abilities or class abilities.

[MassEffect762]

LMAO.


Looks to bioware *Gives the bird* <_<

[InvaderErl]

I know, I'm still trying to figure out how to switch to Garrus, like they promised in ME1 or how to use the interrupts, or how to bring up that team command screen, or how to erect those force fields the Geth always use that was also promised.

You were talking about ME1 right?

Modifié par InvaderErl, 13 juin 2010 - 07:38 .

[SkullandBonesmember]

InvaderErl wrote...

Your argument is literally changing with every post, its all over the place.

And what exactly has "changed" in your eyes?

[MythicalKnight]

Haters gonna hate, so leave the poor boy alone.

[_purifico_]

Nice job. I personally loved the game, but boy did I laugh hard at that video. Well done, sir, well done.

[hagren]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

BlackyBlack wrote...

I bet most of these ignorant ME2 haters would have really hated ME1 if they followed it from the start.
When ME1 came out the forums were filled with people complaining it's not an RPG and complaining about the Mako
I also remember that back when it was announced that ammo was unlimited people complained why and didn't like it

I was around for the first board.

There were 2 types of people complaining about ME1.

The "WE WANTZ MOAR 'SPLOSHUNS" crowd which made up the majority and then the "NOT ENUFF STATS" crowd and stats/skills are role playing in the most shallow of ways as my buddy from the original board put it.

InvaderErl wrote...

Okay then in any case, still no.

Look to the second post.

http://social.biowar...5/index/2816665

Ash/Kaiden  come out on top but Tali actually has more to say than her ME1 self and Garrus is roughly even and Liara and Wrex fall in the lower half when ranked by total lines spoken when compared to all squadmates.

Also, Ecael shows that while generic dialogue in ME2 is at least different depending on the squadmate - ME1's generic dialogue is total cut and paste.

Still no. The ones who weren't content with dialogue in ME2 and make up groups like this-
http://social.bioware.com/group/1763/

were disappointed with the lack of personal ONE ON ONE chats in relaxed enviroments and any form of entire crew debriefings, not random handful of lines on HUB worlds or in between combat.  

You may be content with those little moments that hardly interfere with your headshots, but we weren't.

One on one moments? Like, when you visit them on board the SR2 and talk with them? Especially Mordin, Samara and Thane have loads to talk to you before and after the loyalty missions, have unique dialogue outside of missions and comment on the mission/squad onboard.

Modifié par hagren, 26 août 2010 - 05:01 .

[Arcadionn]

Funny Vid. But I'm among these people whom loved both games despite their flaws.

[Jebel Krong]

SkullandBonesmember wrote...

InvaderErl wrote...

Its the old, "SHOOTERZ r FOR TEH STUPID PEOPLZ" argument.

No. Shooters aren't for "stupid people". I play Grand Theft Auto when I feel a need for 'SPLOSHUNS. But when playing a Bioware title, I expect, as a result of their infamous reputation for quality RPGs, to be presented with epic characters, character interaction, and epic story telling. Combat is pretty low on my list for what I look for in a game from Bioware.

thankfully you get all those things AND combat in me2, then, eh?

oh and: shut. up. your retarded trolling is incredibly wearisome. <_<

Modifié par Jebel Krong, 26 août 2010 - 03:17 .

[hagren]

This is a character who lives in the shadows, moves in the shadows, and when he comes out of the shadows we want it to be a great reveal.

true, refers to the closing scene of the Dantius tower mission.

He's not the type of assassin who's gonna kill someone with a sniper rifle from a mile away. He needs to be there and look them in the eye.

Partially untrue. While he's not a heartless killer, being a more spiritual character, he also has been using sniper rifles before he teamed up with Shep. Possible alteration due to complications with melee combat in armed fights.

We added a new biotic power called pull

Semantics. Difference to lift minimal, but existing. Therefore, critical assessment wrong.

...give specific commands to your squad members in real time

True and true. Pause not needed to give commands (Real-time). Squad members now able to move to specific points on the map independently (Specific).

not forcing you into cover

Cover manual instead of sticky, therefore true. Objection that cover still significant to survival not applicable because a) he is pointing that out in the same scene and classes like Vanguard able to survive without heavy usage of cover

Need of using fuel and ammo

Objection of ret-con off-topic. Marketing not erroneous.

You get to scan planets, almost like a planet toy

Opinion of mini-game irrelevant. Footage of said minigame featured. Marketing factual, not erroneous.

Reminds me of high-minded sci-fi such as Asimov

Clearly subjective opinion, not factual statement. In future, not going to point out these obviously irrelevant exclamations.

You become and build the character

Correct assessment. Able to choose alignment, gender, class, weapons, appereance, armour, powers and make moral choices. Emotional connection or lack thereof entirely subjective.

You know why you're shooting who you're shooting

Correct. Game gives motivation and racial/character-specific/plot-driven background to add reason to the gunfights.

It's commander Shepard's story. That's the Mass Effect story.

Correct. Shepard link to all missions, main protagonist, hero.

Gathering the team, keeping them together, getting them do what you want-->key of the game

Hypercorrect, refer to all criticisms of character-driven, episodic plot-approach.

If he has to kill 1 to save 10, he'll do it and he'll enjoy it

Refers to genophage dilemma, therefore not entirely incorrect- Mordin enjoyed being part of the STG and deemed genophage necessary. In-game, goes through character development not being entirely satisfied with methods.

Constantly bring the best and worst out of each other

Refers to unique dialogue and sparse character confrontation. "Constant" part untrue.

There's a huge difference between recruiting your squadmates and retaining your loyalty

True. Apart from minor differences (New power, new outfit) ally may die in end-game when not loyal to the cause. Not to mention loyalty mission unique.

Chopping up monkey parts at the butchers

Possible reference to Omega food store. The world feels more alive thanks to the more frequent bystander dialogues and better animations, but not quite yet on the level of Gothic franchise.

Personal story

True. Outcome and playstyle different between gamers.

Not only good, bad neutral

Aligment system strict, but not always logical. Half-truth.

Ending dependent on aligment

Actually, true. Apart from obvious choice concerning collector base, squad mates may die if aligment points insufficient (Example: On my 1st playthrough, Jack died because I had not enough Paragon points to convince her of only bluffing during her conflict with Miranda).

You can end the game dead

Yes, shocking because the game moves on even when you die, not to mention that you can lose squad mates and still progress. Therefore, true.

Emotions other than anger

Very subjective, therefore possibly true. I for my part got very attached to some characters and panicked when I thought Thane and Miranda dead at the end of the suicide mission.


Verdict: Try harder next time
Not to mention that it's not unusual that marketing may be misleading, exactly because that is its purpose.

You should do one of these for Fable II, that might be more successful

Modifié par hagren, 26 août 2010 - 04:55 .

[smudboy]

Since this was done for fun, I'm going to act like a retard to your retardness.

[quote]hagren wrote...

He's not the type of assassin who's gonna kill someone with a sniper rifle from a mile away. He needs to be there and look them in the eye.

Partially untrue. While he's not a heartless killer, being a more spiritual character, he also has been using sniper rifles before he teamed up with Shep. Possible alteration due to complications with melee combat in armed fights.
[/quote]
Thane uses sniper rifles.  You are an idiot.

[quote]
We added a new biotic power called pull

Semantics. Difference to lift minimal, but existing. Therefore, critical assessment wrong.
[/quote]
It is not new.  It may be improved, but he didn't say that.  Effects look exactly the same to me.

[quote]
...give specific commands to your squad members in real time

True and true. Pause not needed to give commands (Real-time). Squad members now able to move to specific points on the map independently (Specific).
[/quote]
OMG THEY ADDED A MACRO WTF?!

[quote]
not forcing you into cover

Cover manual instead of sticky, therefore true. Objection that cover still significant to survival not applicable because a) he is pointing that out in the same scene and classes like Vanguard able to survive without heavy usage of cover
[/quote]
The game is a cover shooter.  The game is completely designed to be a cover shooter.  Vanguards have to use cover or they will die.

Did you know this game is a cover shooter?  Like all those indestructible chest high boxes lying around?

This is because the game is a cover shooter.

[quote]
Need of using fuel and ammo

Objection of ret-con off-topic. Marketing not erroneous.
[/quote]
Nyar nyar nyar, nyar nyar, wtf?  It's a ret con.  It's not only a bad retcon, it's sh*t.

[quote]
You get to scan planets, almost like a planet toy

Opinion of mini-game irrelevant. Footage of said minigame featured. Marketing factual, not erroneous.
[/quote]
When marketing a game, you're supposed to market a fun thing, not a boring piece of crap.

[quote]
Reminds me of high-minded sci-fi such as Asimov

Clearly subjective opinion, not factual statement. In future, not going to point out these obviously irrelevant exclamations.
[/quote]
Still absolutely incorrect and laugh worthy.

[quote]
You become and build the character

Correct assessment. Able to choose alignment, gender, class, weapons, appereance, armour, powers and make moral choices. Emotional connection or lack thereof entirely subjective.
[/quote]
You do not "become" or "build" Shepard's character.  There is no Shepard development.  No Shepard building.  You're referring to items, gear, equipment, and their upgrades, not SHEPARD'S CHARACTER.

[quote]
You know why you're shooting who you're shooting

Correct. Game gives motivation and racial/character-specific/plot-driven background to add reason to the gunfights.
[/quote]
Girl = moron.  This is not a marketing angle.  This is comic relief.  Of course I didn't expect people to take it seriously, but you're a moron too, so hey, it works out.

[quote]
It's commander Shepard's story. That's the Mass Effect story.

Correct. Shepard link to all missions, main protagonist, hero.
[/quote]
Shepard may be the protagonist. That doesn't mamke it Shepard's story. Anyone could've been the protagonist, and that doesn't make it ersatz anyone's story.

[quote]
Gathering the team, keeping them together, getting them do what you want-->key of the game

Hypercorrect, refer to all criticisms of character-driven, episodic plot-approach.
[/quote]
HYPERFAILURE.

These are optional.  There is no "keeping them together."  There is no "character-driven" plot.  There are no "episodes."

[quote]
If he has to kill 1 to save 10, he'll do it and he'll enjoy it

Refers to genophage dilemma, therefore not entirely incorrect- Mordin enjoyed being part of the STG and deemed genophage necessary. In-game, goes through character development not being entirely satisfied with methods.
[/quote]
Mordin is not a sadist.  He does not enjoy killing.  The guy clearly states Mordin enjoys killing.  He is wrong.  You are wrong.  You are an idiot.

[quote]
Constantly bring the best and worst out of each other

Refers to unique dialogue and sparse character confrontation. "Constant" part untrue.
[/quote]
I don't even remember.  I don't recall anything in the narrative where the "best" or "worst" of anyone is "brought out."

[quote]
There's a huge difference between recruiting your squadmates and retaining your loyalty

True. Apart from minor differences (New power, new outfit) ally may die in end-game when not loyal to the cause. Not to mention loyalty mission unique.
[/quote]
Another violent mission/fetch quest/daddy issue story?  OH NOES, THE HUGE DIFFERENCES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[quote]
Chopping up monkey parts at the butchers

Possible reference to Omega food store. The world feels more alive thanks to the more frequent bystander dialogues and better animations, but not quite yet on the level of Gothic franchise.
[/quote]
I have no idea what he was referring to, and I don't want to know, monkey boy.

[quote]
Personal story

True. Outcome and playstyle different between gamers.
[/quote]
Different does not mean personal.  What's personal?  What, romance options?  What?  What?

[quote]
Not only good, bad neutral

Aligment system strict, but not always logical. Half-truth.
[/quote]
What alignment?  Since when was P/R alignment based?  P/R doesn't even know wtf it is half the time, and neither do we.

[quote]
Ending dependent on aligment

Actually, true. Apart from obvious choice concerning collector base, squad mates may die if aligment points insufficient (Example: On my 1st playthrough, Jack died because I had not enough Paragon points to convince her of only bluffing during her conflict with Miranda).
[/quote]
The ending has nothign to do with alignment, or wtf P/R is.

[quote]
You can end the game dead

Yes, shocking because the game moves on even when you die, not to mention that you can lose squad mates and still progress. Therefore, true.
[/quote]
YOU CAN DIE ON A SUICIDE MISSION!?

[quote]
Emotions other than anger

Very subjective, therefore possibly true. I for my part got very attached to some characters and panicked when I thought Thane and Miranda dead at the end of the suicide mission.
[/quote]
Very subjective, therefore false.

[quote]
Verdict: Try harder next time
Not to mention that it's not unusual that marketing may be misleading, exactly because that is its purpose.
[/quote]
Do yourself a favor and don't even bother. I did it for the lulz you dinglehopper.

[quote]
You should do one of these for Fable II, that might be more successful [/quote]
NO U

Modifié par smudboy, 26 août 2010 - 05:50 .

[Tyrant Wrex]

Even though I didn't agree with all of it, that was easily the most coherent and cohesive case against ME2 I've ever seen (which isn't saying much, frankly). Pretty funny too, regardless of veracity quotient.

Its already been said, but marketing for any product tends to be on the hyperbolic side, that doesn't suffice as a argumentative mechanism whereby the total value of the product may be undermined.

Modifié par Tyrant Wrex, 26 août 2010 - 08:13 .

[hagren]

smudboy wrote...

Since this was done for fun, I'm going to act like a retard to your retardness.

Thane uses sniper rifles.  You are an idiot.

That's exactly what I wrote. That's the reason why it's red (Error from marketing's part)

It is not new.  It may be improved, but he didn't say that.  Effects look exactly the same to me.

Others have already discussed that it's not the same. Very similar, but not exactly the same. Ergo, his statement wasn't incorrect. But it may be a semantic problem on his part.

OMG THEY ADDED A MACRO WTF?!

Not just a macro, but also the ability to tell your squad to take cover independently. Again, your video was about marketing errors, but what he said was true.

The game is a cover shooter.  The game is completely designed to be a cover shooter.  Vanguards have to use cover or they will die.

Did you know this game is a cover shooter?  Like all those indestructible chest high boxes lying around?

This is because the game is a cover shooter.

I never stated it's not a cover shooter, and the individual in the vid also said that cover is very significant. Therefore, no error.

Nyar nyar nyar, nyar nyar, wtf?  It's a ret con.  It's not only a bad retcon, it's sh*t.

It may be ****, and it is a ret-con, but what has that to do with erroneous marketing?


When marketing a game, you're supposed to market a fun thing, not a boring piece of crap.

Your video is called "Marketing of errors", not "Marketing and how it should not be done", no?


Still absolutely incorrect and laugh worthy.

Perhaps, but again, not related to your vid's title.


You do not "become" or "build" Shepard's character.  There is no Shepard development.  No Shepard building.  You're referring to items, gear, equipment, and their upgrades, not SHEPARD'S CHARACTER.

You are confusing "personality" with "figure" in this case. I'm pretty sure he meant the latter, and there's still the element of choosing Shepard's reactions. 


Girl = moron.  This is not a marketing angle.  This is comic relief.  Of course I didn't expect people to take it seriously, but you're a moron too, so hey, it works out.

Have I said what she said was valuable or insightful? No, only that it is correct. Of course it's a pretty stupid statement.


Shepard may be the protagonist. That doesn't mamke it Shepard's story. Anyone could've been the protagonist, and that doesn't make it ersatz anyone's story.

It does. Shepard's a pre-determined character and drives the plot as squad leader, hero and authority figure. Sure, we could replace him with someone else, but we're not talking hyperbole here. In its current state, where Shepard is in the game, it's Shepard's story. That's why he's not in the books, for instance.


These are optional.  There is no "keeping them together."  There is no "character-driven" plot.  There are no "episodes."

Given that the loyalty and recruiting missions are secluded from the main plot, they are episodic. And given that you spend most of the time with said missions, the game is certainly character-driven, or at the very least character-focused.


Mordin is not a sadist.  He does not enjoy killing.  The guy clearly states Mordin enjoys killing.  He is wrong.  You are wrong.  You are an idiot.

He is wrong, which is why the text was in red. I didn't agree with him. Maybe you should take time to actually realize what I write instead of jumping at my throat.


I don't even remember.  I don't recall anything in the narrative where the "best" or "worst" of anyone is "brought out."

There were two character confrontations. Because they're really very sporadic, I assessed the statement by BW as wrong.


Another violent mission/fetch quest/daddy issue story?  OH NOES, THE HUGE DIFFERENCES!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please take some effort to see what I've written. The loyalty mission is important because if not done, xy squad mate might die. The difference between life or death seems pretty huge to me


I have no idea what he was referring to, and I don't want to know, monkey boy.

On Omega there is a diner for Aliens where they may chop meat.


Different does not mean personal.  What's personal?  What, romance options?  What?  What?

Personal as in "your choice", "not the same for everyone". Which is true.


What alignment?  Since when was P/R alignment based?  P/R doesn't even know wtf it is half the time, and neither do we.

Maybe I'm using the word incorrectly. But since there's grey morally but not mechanically, his statement was wrong.


The ending has nothign to do with alignment, or wtf P/R is.

[/i]I just gave you two examples. Jack died on me because I didn't have enough Paragon points to regain her loyalty. And depending on whether you choose the Renegade or Paragon option, the ending's different. Ergo, aligment (or however P/R system's called) definitely influences the ending.


YOU CAN DIE ON A SUICIDE MISSION!?

Again, the element of death isn't surprising. That however any of your teammates might die, including yourself, whilst still advancing in the game (With the former even into ME3) is definitely special.

[i]
Very subjective, therefore false.

No, therefore both outcomes possible.


Do yourself a favor and don't even bother. I did it for the lulz you dinglehopper.

If you are not interested in hearing our opinions on something you did, why do you think should anyone be interested in your thoughts in the first place?

NO U

Why? Believe me, there's enough fodder to fill two videos with false marketing

There was no hostility, only analysis in my post (similar to your video critique), and was conceived as such to form a basis of polite and constructive discussion, which you immediately shot down by unnecessarily name-calling and demeaning me in your reply. 
I hoped that for someone who made a video critique (Which I'm aware isn't meant to be taken completely seriously) is open for criticism or at least corteous discussion on your end, but it seems my trust may have been misplaced.

And given that such behaviour should not be endorsed, I have reported your post.

Modifié par hagren, 27 août 2010 - 12:02 .

[Rhomer]

I bow before Smudboy's coherency, he may be chatty but he knows his s@#.