189 réponses à ce sujet

[smudboy]

SithLordExarKun wrote...
And how do you know i was "shoveling" that right at you? Or do you assume it as such when all i did was ask a simple question to ecael because obviously the very first point wasn't about you.

By the way your attempt at being sarcastic fails to impress anyone which includes me, you might want to try that out once again.
Lastly, quit being so petty, i wasn't attacking you, so please don't play the victim.

Because everything you write is awesome, so naturally when you turn your genius brain against me, I can only assume you'd bother to do so to shovel the dregs of your awesome, my way.  I can only hope to deem the vapors of said mental fortitude in the hopes my petty insignificant and clearly fragile argument is not shattered into the already destroyed life I lead, which is already in shambles.

Also, you have a big ****.

Speculate. Or at least wait until ME3's out which should conclude
everything. ME2 obviously left alot of unanswered questions, exactly
the same way the first game did(like y'know with your logic of form
following fuction, why is it never explained why reapers fly in every
500000 years and blow the whole galaxy to kingdom come).

Why should ME3 conclude anything, let alone everything?  What makes you say that?  Every answer will be explained?  Cause there's a 3 in there?  Cause it's the end of a trilogy?  ME2 proved that BioWare can do wtf it wants.  And if ME2 was a success, why not repeat it?  Shepard will just shoot something at the end with his gun.

You
don't expect everything to be answered immediately do you? Theres a
reason they left alot out of the picture for the human reaper at least,
they want it to be ambiguous, exactly the same way george lucas
never answered if Darth Plaguies was Anakins father due to him having
the ability to create life with the force.

I expect things to make sense.  If you can make sense of them, then that goes to show you just how unbelievably genius you are.  I say you are the blessed Reaper, and I the lowly human, amidst a sea of slushy confusion and questions.  I cannot dare to swim against the torrent that is your vast, infinitely superior mind.

Wheres the fun if
everything is simply spoon fed and given to you at first hand?

There is plenty of fun to be had in good writing.  If you do not know the difference, well, this is but a testament to what mere mortals call ignorance and stupidity.

Your attitude and your expectations are.
You expect a video game to go into genetic detail(which is the
scientific level of many geneticists in universities) to explain how a
human reaper is formed, thats exactly how ridiculous you are.

No, I expect the super Reaper Overmind God Sufficiently Adavnced Alien species thingies to get some exposition.  Not "ASSUMING DIRECT PLOT CONTROL TO AMBIGUOUSNESS, OH LOOK I'M A HOLOGRAM."

See the above.

I see myself.

Oh wait, that's you and your massive intellect.  I got confused there.

Or as Ecael would say:

Modifié par smudboy, 05 juillet 2010 - 03:34 .

[smudboy]

Il Divo wrote...
See, here you bring up a very interesting point especially the bold. It touches a hypocrisy I've yet to understand about the Reapers from Mass Effect 1 which you touch on in your video. These are beings who claim that humanity is beneath their notice, no more than ants essentially. If that is the case, we shouldn't even be worth the attention of attempted genocide in the first place. I personally do not go out of my way to step on ants I come across, but likewise I probably wouldn't notice if I stepped on an ant. That is why they are "beneath my notice".

I personally think that Sovereign's speech in Mass Effect 1 was designed for maximum impact but minimal logic.  
Clearly we are not beneath their notice if they intentionally go out of their way to cull us every 50k years. Hence why reproduction seems a sensible goal for the Reapers.

I don't think it was minimal logic: I think they just threw the idea of what the Reapers are, and their goals were, away.  They obviously didn't decent exposition or development toward them.  There is clearly a disconnect between the two.

Unless "WE ARE THE HARBINGER OF YOUR PERFECTION" does it for you.

I understand augmentationss. I understand implants. And I definitely understand surgery. What I don't understand is how these all "meshed" (so to speak) together to create a robot/organic being. Saren's body was not enlarged to make room for his robot body. What I don't understand is where augmentation/surgery became "We are going to hide an entire metal body inside you while you remain perfectly functional". I do not yet know of any surgery capable of doing this. Look at Saren's robot skull. Am I to believe he fit that and a brain inside his head? And even more, who or what performed the surgery? We know Saren received them from Sovereign, but how? Did the Husks perform the manual labor? Does he have a giant robot-implanting lab? How?

Why would a metallic skeleton require a change in scale?  You make a metallic bone shaped like a normal bone, or some such, same size, and replace it.  How that works, well that is a good question.

I can buy Saren's augmentation, since cybernetics is a theme in ME.  Well, about a 100x more than I can buy resurrection.

I'm not understanding your argument regarding Saren's robotic/metallic skull.  Do you mean how his brain was working regarding MMI?

Why would Sovereign need a giant robot-implanting lab?  Sovereign is a massive ship: it's possible.  Saren was in control of a few corporations that did medical and weapons research and development.  The idea isn't too far removed that having Mr. Galactic Overmind, resources and infrastructure to do a series of surgeries, making the most advanced cybernetic implants possible.  Saren's goal was to become a slave though example, I think, so it fits he'd be augmented.  It's a pity we didn't see his appearance chance throughout the course of the story, the few times we meet him as we progress.

[Voods07]

Lemonwizard wrote...

Shandepared wrote...

Lemonwizard wrote...

Overrated garbage.

You have a point. However do we seriously want to incorporate Lady Gaga fans into the glorious machine future? I think we should be more selective about who gets turned into a slushy.

WEll, I think Lady Gaga would be an appropriate part of the Human reaper, considering the above stated point discussing being fused together with people we can't stand like Udina....We really would be caught in a bad romance.



Also, I mean, come on....Shepard can't read Sovereign's poker face. Like, at all.

You complain about choc. milk-drinking kids and their opinion about the human reaper; yet you just incorperated two of Lady GaGa's (aka the penis chick) songs' into your counter-arguement. I think the only one here drinking choc. milk and complaining is you....while listening to a transexual singer.

[armass]

Really.... No, really, youd want us to become a reaper, it's not "half bad"?? ..... Yeah....



Are you insane?!

[Il Divo]

smudboy wrote...

I don't think it was minimal logic: I think they just threw the idea of what the Reapers are, and their goals were, away.  They obviously didn't decent exposition or development toward them.  There is clearly a disconnect between the two.

However, in order to make this argument that Bioware threw away their idea of the Reapers, you would have to know what their original intention for the Reapers had been. 

1) Reapers consider organics beneath their notice.
2) Every 50k years Reapers go out of their way to exterminate all organics on an intergalactic level.

This is why I find it odd pointing the proverbial finger at Mass Effect 2. It did not "break" any Reaper logic in Mass Effect 1 because there was none to be had in the first place. "Maximum impact, minimal logic". We find the notion of emotionless machines who commit genocide terrifying and so Mass Effect 1 got a slide on this point.    

Why would a metallic skeleton require a change in scale?  You make a metallic bone shaped like a normal bone, or some such, same size, and replace it.  How that works, well that is a good question.

I can buy Saren's augmentation, since cybernetics is a theme in ME.  Well, about a 100x more than I can buy resurrection.

I'm not understanding your argument regarding Saren's robotic/metallic skull.  Do you mean how his brain was working regarding MMI?

If you examine what we know of Saren, we do not see his body size increase at all. On Virmire he is exactly the same as on the Citadel. I'm curious how with these implants Sovereign was able to fit both a metal skull and his brain while keeping the same basic shape and size. The very notion of someone possessing a metal body within their own is questionable.

Why would Sovereign need a giant robot-implanting lab?  Sovereign is a massive ship: it's possible.  Saren was in control of a few corporations that did medical and weapons research and development.  The idea isn't too far removed that having Mr. Galactic Overmind, resources and infrastructure to do a series of surgeries, making the most advanced cybernetic implants possible.  Saren's goal was to become a slave though example, I think, so it fits he'd be augmented.  It's a pity we didn't see his appearance chance throughout the course of the story, the few times we meet him as we progress.

This ultimately is speculation. I am fine with this. However, why does this not apply when considering Mass Effect 2? We ask, what was the human reaper for? Why does it look human? Why did it the Reapers use humans in its construction? If we can accept Sovereign possessing the technology to encase an entire metal body inside someone (without them even being fully aware as Saren wasn't), I can see the Reapers possessing technology to melt down humans into liquid to produce a new Reaper.  That's what alot of criticisms of the human Reaper fall to: lack of explanation which is also the case with Saren's robot.

Modifié par Il Divo, 05 juillet 2010 - 04:20 .

[smudboy]

Il Divo wrote...
However, in order to make this argument that Bioware threw away their idea of the Reapers, you would have to know what their original intention for the Reapers had been. 

1) Reapers consider organics beneath their notice.
2) Every 50k years Reapers go out of their way to exterminate all organics on an intergalactic level.

This is why I find it odd pointing the proverbial finger at Mass Effect 2. It did not "break" any Reaper logic in Mass Effect 1 because there was none to be had in the first place. "Maximum impact, minimal logic". We find the notion of emotionless machines who commit genocide terrifying and so Mass Effect 1 got a slide on this point.    

I don't see how there was no logic in the first place.  Exposition was granted.  Sovereign was communicating.  Our behavior is meaningless ("nothing") to it, because they're going to conduct their cycle of destruction, and that's what they do.  It is this function of the Citadel that is their Master Plan.

ME2 does not explain or expand on this plan, but does something completely different.  I can buy that humans are needed to make a Reaper, or whatever the Reapers want with organics: but it wasn't explained.  What was shown was insane.

If you examine what we know of Saren, we do not see his body size increase at all. On Virmire he is exactly the same as on the Citadel. I'm curious how with these implants Sovereign was able to fit both a metal skull and his brain while keeping the same basic shape and size. The very notion of someone possessing a metal body within their own is questionable.

Again I fail to see how a metallic replica suddenly means "bigger size."  It's like saying Luke Skywalker's arm should be this out of place hulking robot part.

This ultimately is speculation. I am fine with this. However, why does this not apply when considering Mass Effect 2? We ask, what was the human reaper for? Why does it look human? Why did it the Reapers use humans in its construction? If we can accept Sovereign possessing the technology to encase an entire metal body inside someone (without them even being fully aware as Saren wasn't), I can see the Reapers possessing technology to melt down humans into liquid to produce a new Reaper.  That's what alot of criticisms of the human Reaper fall to: lack of explanation which is also the case with Saren's robot.

I was waiting for you to get to this.

Saren was aware of his augments.  Before the last battle with him "Sovereign has upgraded me."  Sovereign possessed Saren, not unlike how Harbinger possessed his drones.  How you see this as a connection that Reapers possess technology to melt down humans to make a Reaper is your own wild imagination.  Replacing a limb with an artificial limb isn't that big of a stretch, and MMI is a very common theme in sci-fi.  Although I would've loved more explanation about Saren's implants, it wasn't necessary, because Saren told us it happened, and we saw it first hand.  My mind wasn't in absolute shock when I saw a skeleton jumping like a super-geth at me.  It played along with the theme of slavery vs. destruction, and what side Saren represented.

There's little to no explanation on the series of questions a Human Reapers function and motivation was all about, and what the devil this has to do with ME1's "illogical" plot.

[IoCaster]

Ecael wrote...

smudboy wrote...

Ecael wrote...
Since you're claiming that your whining is constructive, exactly how would BioWare or its fans stand to benefit from all that criticism of yours? Let me guess - you're just doing it for yourself, right? Not constructive.

I'm not whining, but keep repeating yourself.  You know, the more you do it, the more real it becomes.

I do everything for myself.  I don't see how that's not constructive, or anything else for that matter.

If one can point out a flaw, in detail, in something, then it begs the question of how that flaw can be fixed.

BioWare's good at simply removing flaws or problems completely.

It's not constructive when it's a waste of time for everyone else. That's the problem, you beg the question. You don't even attempt to answer it, otherwise that might require actual thinking.

There are many ways, especially in writing, to fix things.  It's called having an imagination.  I see you are very imaginative in coming up with amateur game designs to fix flaws.  There is no difference between that skill and writing.  All writers have wonderful, intelligent ideas that can fix flaws.  I do not need to brainstorm, because that is pointless: anyone can do this.

Anyone can "point out flaws" in anything. Including five-year old children who think the world revolves around them and must change to fit only their needs.

Additionally, I've no interest in imposing my view of a "fix", because that's subjective.  Anyone, after noticing a flaw, had multiple ways of thinking of how to correct that flaw.

You say that as if your criticism is objective, yet you still don't provide the same amount of analysis for the other games you've played.

No, I'm really feeling awesome whenever I write and make videos.  Like I said before, it's all me me me.

Oh I do. They're so big, I wonder if anyone else can understand my "stuff".

Yup, compulsive, not cathartic. You're sounding more and more selfish and bitter as you post.

What the hell is going on here? Why the personal focus Ecael?

Everyone and anyone is entitled to come on this board and criticize the game as long as they don't violate the TOS. Full Stop.

You've obsessively gone out of your way to assume the mantle of 'defender of the faith' way too often for you to point fingers at anyone else for compulsive behavior.

It's not your business, nor do you have the authority to set limits on discussion here. I also reject the contention that any criticism that I or anyone else has about ME2 needs to be constructive. In addition, there's no requirement in any rational debate to criticize ME as a prerequisite to justify criticism of ME2.

I've always thought of you as a reasonable and rational forumite, but these types of posts are borderline abusive. What's the problem?

[Jaron Oberyn]

IoCaster wrote...

Ecael wrote...

smudboy wrote...

Ecael wrote...
Since you're claiming that your whining is constructive, exactly how would BioWare or its fans stand to benefit from all that criticism of yours? Let me guess - you're just doing it for yourself, right? Not constructive.

I'm not whining, but keep repeating yourself.  You know, the more you do it, the more real it becomes.

I do everything for myself.  I don't see how that's not constructive, or anything else for that matter.

If one can point out a flaw, in detail, in something, then it begs the question of how that flaw can be fixed.

BioWare's good at simply removing flaws or problems completely.

It's not constructive when it's a waste of time for everyone else. That's the problem, you beg the question. You don't even attempt to answer it, otherwise that might require actual thinking.

There are many ways, especially in writing, to fix things.  It's called having an imagination.  I see you are very imaginative in coming up with amateur game designs to fix flaws.  There is no difference between that skill and writing.  All writers have wonderful, intelligent ideas that can fix flaws.  I do not need to brainstorm, because that is pointless: anyone can do this.

Anyone can "point out flaws" in anything. Including five-year old children who think the world revolves around them and must change to fit only their needs.

Additionally, I've no interest in imposing my view of a "fix", because that's subjective.  Anyone, after noticing a flaw, had multiple ways of thinking of how to correct that flaw.

You say that as if your criticism is objective, yet you still don't provide the same amount of analysis for the other games you've played.

No, I'm really feeling awesome whenever I write and make videos.  Like I said before, it's all me me me.

Oh I do. They're so big, I wonder if anyone else can understand my "stuff".

Yup, compulsive, not cathartic. You're sounding more and more selfish and bitter as you post.

What the hell is going on here? Why the personal focus Ecael?

Everyone and anyone is entitled to come on this board and criticize the game as long as they don't violate the TOS. Full Stop.

You've obsessively gone out of your way to assume the mantle of 'defender of the faith' way too often for you to point fingers at anyone else for compulsive behavior.

It's not your business, nor do you have the authority to set limits on discussion here. I also reject the contention that any criticism that I or anyone else has about ME2 needs to be constructive. In addition, there's no requirement in any rational debate to criticize ME as a prerequisite to justify criticism of ME2.

I've always thought of you as a reasonable and rational forumite, but these types of posts are borderline abusive. What's the problem?

Seems like typical fanboyism. People don't like others criticizing a game that they love. While it's alright to show a little defense on the matter, going all out like this is uncalled for. I've seen behavior like this on Bungie forums, never thought I'd see it on a Bioware forum. You can't go setting the standard for how people can criticize a video game. Everyone is free to give their own opinion. That's the way it works. Regardless of whether its positive or negative. Attacking someone based on their opinion is bound to give you a bad reputation. This needs to be stopped before it gets out of hand. I've been watching this little convo for a while, and honestly enough is enough. 

 -Polite

[Tooneyman]

Sorry this whole conversations is just priceless!

[IoCaster]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Seems like typical fanboyism. People don't like others criticizing a game that they love. While it's alright to show a little defense on the matter, going all out like this is uncalled for. I've seen behavior like this on Bungie forums, never thought I'd see it on a Bioware forum. You can't go setting the standard for how people can criticize a video game. Everyone is free to give their own opinion. That's the way it works. Regardless of whether its positive or negative. Attacking someone based on their opinion is bound to give you a bad reputation. This needs to be stopped before it gets out of hand. I've been watching this little convo for a while, and honestly enough is enough. 

 -Polite

I agree. Debating the validity of an assertion that the game is riddled with plot holes or badly written would seemingly be a legitimate topic for discussion. Using a disagreement about it as a springboard for accusations of whining, bitter, immature or compulsive behavior is pushing the bounds of civil discourse. Oh well, it's probably best to let this die off and move on.

[fivefingaslap18]

It's not that what is being discussed is unacceptable, it's who is writing about it. Smudboy has some good points, but instead of knowing where to stop, he still shovels in the excrement too far down the throat until it starts falling out of the side of the mouth. Plus, if no one agrees with his points completely and implores another idea that shows that the thought process for the character or the situation is still logical: repulsion and further "disagreement" ensues.



It really comes down to the fact that some people need to take a step back, look at the situation, and figure out the best course of action. I'm not doing this to bait Smudboy (although if read that's what it looks like sadly), it's just something I've noticed about him personally.



By the way IoCaster, how did you make your Shepard a Chiss?

[Ecael]

IoCaster wrote...

What the hell is going on here? Why the personal focus Ecael?

Everyone and anyone is entitled to come on this board and criticize the game as long as they don't violate the TOS. Full Stop.

You've obsessively gone out of your way to assume the mantle of 'defender of the faith' way too often for you to point fingers at anyone else for compulsive behavior.

It's not your business, nor do you have the authority to set limits on discussion here. I also reject the contention that any criticism that I or anyone else has about ME2 needs to be constructive. In addition, there's no requirement in any rational debate to criticize ME as a prerequisite to justify criticism of ME2.

I've always thought of you as a reasonable and rational forumite, but these types of posts are borderline abusive. What's the problem?

Borderline abusive like the posts people make whenever a BioWare developer tries to make a point? Stanley Woo used to participate in forum discussion until he got fed up with ME2 forum critics trying to dismiss all of his explanations. He was literally the last one to even do so. Now he's only present when a thread needs to be locked.

So call on a moderator if you like. It's usually Stanley.

He's also one of the Quality Assurance Story Team Members, so I'm sure he'll appreciate some of the forumites' "opinions" of Mass Effect 2's story while you're at it.

Or not.

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Seems like typical fanboyism. People don't like others criticizing a game that they love. While it's alright to show a little defense on the matter, going all out like this is uncalled for. I've seen behavior like this on Bungie forums, never thought I'd see it on a Bioware forum. You can't go setting the standard for how people can criticize a video game. Everyone is free to give their own opinion. That's the way it works. Regardless of whether its positive or negative. Attacking someone based on their opinion is bound to give you a bad reputation. This needs to be stopped before it gets out of hand. I've been watching this little convo for a while, and honestly enough is enough. 

 -Polite

Here's a question for you. What is my favorite video game developer?

A) Blizzard
Nintendo
C) Valve
D) BioWare

(Hint: It's not BioWare)

fanboy/fangirl - someone who is utterly devoted to a single subject or hobby, often to the point where it is considered an obsession.

People on these forums have made it a hobby to criticize one single BioWare game without even taking a second look at the other games. I'm not saying any one game is flawless. I am saying that every game is flawed (including BioWare games), but not to the proportion that some people make it out to be.

I defend any BioWare game I play to completion, including Mass Effect 1, Mass Effect 2 and Dragon Age. The same goes for most Nintendo, Blizzard and Valve games (and maybe the old Squaresoft too). I dislike whiners, and there are certainly a lot of them on the Blizzard forums whining about any possible aspect or topic of every Blizzard game.

Smudboy insists on only analyzing one single game as if the last one was perfect, so I'd say the definition fits him much, much better.

Like I told him, consider the meaning of the words you use before you throw them around. Preferably without vulgar language, like some other people.

Modifié par Ecael, 05 juillet 2010 - 05:43 .

[SnakeHelah]

Blizzard?

[NvVanity]

SnakeHelah wrote...

Blizzard?

My money is on Valve.

[Ecael]

NvVanity wrote...

SnakeHelah wrote...

Blizzard?

My money is on Valve.

There appears to be disagreement! I guess that means I'm just a video game fan...

[NvVanity]

Ecael wrote...

NvVanity wrote...

SnakeHelah wrote...

Blizzard?

My money is on Valve.

There appears to be disagreement! I guess that means I'm just a video game fan...

There can't be a disagreement I'm totally right and i'm now going to throw careless accusations and whine to prove i'm right.

[smudboy]

fivefingaslap18 wrote...

It's not that what is being discussed is unacceptable, it's who is writing about it. Smudboy has some good points, but instead of knowing where to stop, he still shovels in the excrement too far down the throat until it starts falling out of the side of the mouth. Plus, if no one agrees with his points completely and implores another idea that shows that the thought process for the character or the situation is still logical: repulsion and further "disagreement" ensues.

It really comes down to the fact that some people need to take a step back, look at the situation, and figure out the best course of action. I'm not doing this to bait Smudboy (although if read that's what it looks like sadly), it's just something I've noticed about him personally.

By the way IoCaster, how did you make your Shepard a Chiss?

Please show my "excrement."  I tend to make a habit of repeating myself in the most creative though redundant of manners.  I stop when I don't feel there's anything left to say, or I've conceded the poster is gone.  I don't even start with some posters, because their head is so far up their ass it's beyond logic and reason.  Not that it's their fault: sometimes people just get enthusiastic over something, that reason has no place for them.  I am not one of these people.

Every day I read the "don't worry: ME3 will explain it."  Which has got to be one of the most insulting things to anyone on here, writer, creator and audience.  "Don't worry.  The problems and tidings of this current work will all be made clear later."  Which essentially means "this work is uselss as is, but it'll get better later, so stfu."

I don't expect anyone to agree with me completely, nor care.  I respond to posts with my own opinions based on evidence.  I do find my opinions more informed and reasonable, and people who share them also have the same observations and evidence to present.  If you can't argue with me because you simply cannot take the evidence and arguments presented, then stop: it will end badly.  The majority of those who disagree resort to using emoticons and enjoy turning this place into 4chan.

[InvaderErl]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Seems like typical fanboyism. People don't like others criticizing a game that they love. While it's alright to show a little defense on the matter, going all out like this is uncalled for. I've seen behavior like this on Bungie forums, never thought I'd see it on a Bioware forum. You can't go setting the standard for how people can criticize a video game. Everyone is free to give their own opinion. That's the way it works. Regardless of whether its positive or negative. Attacking someone based on their opinion is bound to give you a bad reputation. This needs to be stopped before it gets out of hand. I've been watching this little convo for a while, and honestly enough is enough. 

 -Polite

To be fair, Smudboy seems to be fishing for these kinds of arguments - he throws out the bait and Ecael responds and they squabble for about 10-20 pages.

Also, in Ecael's defense in his/her (I forget) sig there are threads with ACTUAL constructive criticism and suggestions as oppossed to just internet ****ing videos (which is Smudboy's right of course).

Modifié par InvaderErl, 05 juillet 2010 - 06:05 .

[IoCaster]

fivefingaslap18 wrote...

It's not that what is being discussed is unacceptable, it's who is writing about it. Smudboy has some good points, but instead of knowing where to stop, he still shovels in the excrement too far down the throat until it starts falling out of the side of the mouth. Plus, if no one agrees with his points completely and implores another idea that shows that the thought process for the character or the situation is still logical: repulsion and further "disagreement" ensues.

It's a legitimate part of debate to disagree and know when to stop before resorting to personal insults. The best method is to arrive at an impasse, agree to disagree, and move on. *shrug*

fivefingaslap18 wrote...
By the way IoCaster, how did you make your Shepard a Chiss?

He's actually a 'male' Asari and one of a kind. His father was a human colonist and his mother an Asari mercenary. It was an "Immaculate Conceptualization" and fits the theme of the resurrected Space Messiah in ME2. 

:blink::happy::PB)

I used the Gibbed Save Editor to alter his appearance after creating the face at the start of the game.

[NvVanity]

smudboy wrote...

fivefingaslap18 wrote...

It's not that what is being discussed is unacceptable, it's who is writing about it. Smudboy has some good points, but instead of knowing where to stop, he still shovels in the excrement too far down the throat until it starts falling out of the side of the mouth. Plus, if no one agrees with his points completely and implores another idea that shows that the thought process for the character or the situation is still logical: repulsion and further "disagreement" ensues.

It really comes down to the fact that some people need to take a step back, look at the situation, and figure out the best course of action. I'm not doing this to bait Smudboy (although if read that's what it looks like sadly), it's just something I've noticed about him personally.

By the way IoCaster, how did you make your Shepard a Chiss?

Please show my "excrement."  I tend to make a habit of repeating myself in the most creative though redundant of manners.  I stop when I don't feel there's anything left to say, or I've conceded the poster is gone.  I don't even start with some posters, because their head is so far up their ass it's beyond logic and reason.  Not that it's their fault: sometimes people just get enthusiastic over something, that reason has no place for them.  I am not one of these people.

Every day I read the "don't worry: ME3 will explain it."  Which has got to be one of the most insulting things to anyone on here, writer, creator and audience.  "Don't worry.  The problems and tidings of this current work will all be made clear later."  Which essentially means "this work is uselss as is, but it'll get better later, so stfu."

I don't expect anyone to agree with me completely, nor care.  I respond to posts with my own opinions based on evidence.  I do find my opinions more informed and reasonable, and people who share them also have the same observations and evidence to present.  If you can't argue with me because you simply cannot take the evidence and arguments presented, then stop: it will end badly.  The majority of those who disagree resort to using emoticons and enjoy turning this place into 4chan.

By ME3 will explain it you know theres this thing called foreshadowing, alluding towards something to happen in the future. Something appears vague now in ME2 but it adds to the mystery. I don't see why thats insulting to the writers if they intended it. Look at Star Wars, Harry Potter or some other series. We constantly have things appearing vague to be brought up as important and fully explained later.

Hell play Metal Gear Solid that game series takes the cake for taking what looked small and insignificant and turning it into the most major plot point ever. Besides that its a sequel hook anyways. A cliffhanger ending leaving the gamers wondering "I want to know more about that human reaper and what the motivation was behind it" people, authors, game developers, movie directors, etc do it all the time.

[fivefingaslap18]

smudboy wrote...

Please show my "excrement."  I tend to make a habit of repeating myself in the most creative though redundant of manners.  I stop when I don't feel there's anything left to say, or I've conceded the poster is gone.  I don't even start with some posters, because their head is so far up their ass it's beyond logic and reason.  Not that it's their fault: sometimes people just get enthusiastic over something, that reason has no place for them.  I am not one of these people.

Every day I read the "don't worry: ME3 will explain it."  Which has got to be one of the most insulting things to anyone on here, writer, creator and audience.  "Don't worry.  The problems and tidings of this current work will all be made clear later."  Which essentially means "this work is uselss as is, but it'll get better later, so stfu."

I don't expect anyone to agree with me completely, nor care.  I respond to posts with my own opinions based on evidence.  I do find my opinions more informed and reasonable, and people who share them also have the same observations and evidence to present.  If you can't argue with me because you simply cannot take the evidence and arguments presented, then stop: it will end badly.  The majority of those who disagree resort to using emoticons and enjoy turning this place into 4chan.

I said I am not going to argue with you. So I won't. This will frustrate you, or you will think I have nothing to back myself up with. I don't care which you believe.

Although the Human-Reaper Baby with the wheel was funny, I'll give you that.

I agree IoCaster, however Smudboy does not do that which is what I explained in detail. I must say though, it looks too much like a Chiss with it's completely white eyes. Although, I can see where you're going with this. Although, to think that Shepard is an Asari in the Alliance military in ME1 baffles my mind, lol.

Modifié par fivefingaslap18, 05 juillet 2010 - 06:12 .

[Ecael]

InvaderErl wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Seems like typical fanboyism. People don't like others criticizing a game that they love. While it's alright to show a little defense on the matter, going all out like this is uncalled for. I've seen behavior like this on Bungie forums, never thought I'd see it on a Bioware forum. You can't go setting the standard for how people can criticize a video game. Everyone is free to give their own opinion. That's the way it works. Regardless of whether its positive or negative. Attacking someone based on their opinion is bound to give you a bad reputation. This needs to be stopped before it gets out of hand. I've been watching this little convo for a while, and honestly enough is enough. 

 -Polite

To be fair, Smudboy seems to be fishing for these kinds of arguments - he throws out the bait and Ecael responds and they squabble for about 10-20 pages.

Also, in Ecael's defense in his/her (I forget) sig there are threads with ACTUAL constructive criticism and suggestions as oppossed to just internet ****ing videos (which is Smudboy's right of course).

It's not really bait if I squabble with several different people.

[smudboy]

Ecael wrote...
People on these forums have made it a hobby to criticize one single BioWare game without even taking a second look at the other games. I'm not saying any one game is flawless. I am saying that every game is flawed (including BioWare games), but not to the proportion that some people make it out to be.

What logic is this?  So because someone isn't analyzing other games, somehow, their opinions are wrong?

1. Someone thinks ME2 is flawed.
2. Someone hasn't reviewed g(1...n) other games
3. Therefore, this someone's reasoning is flawed.

Really Ecael?

So the amateur reviewer, the amateur or average player, the guy who plays or reads or experiences any piece of media, is somehow...wrong...because they haven't reviewed others? 

Is this truly what you believe?

Maybe, just maybe...and this is just me being Smud here.  Maybe ME2 instigated such a response in someone, that that someone, from the goodness of his heart, felt compelled, not to go out and start playing other games, but to let loose the feelings and thoughts they were inspired to express due to that actual piece of media.  And to discuss that actual piece of media.  Because the other media they experienced?  Didn't affect them the same way.  Kind of what makes ...ah...objects in the universe different.

Smudboy insists on only analyzing one single game as if the last one was perfect, so I'd say the definition fits him much, much better.

I've never said any game was perfect, or as if to be perfect.  Where are you coming up with this drivel?

Like I told him, consider the meaning of the words you use before you throw them around. Preferably without vulgar language, like some other people.

Could you be more specific?  Cause I've considered everything you've written.  And what I've written.  And if you think, I need, to start playing and analyzing other games...for some reason...before I have the authority to express my opinions on another title (let's just maybe perhaps I don't know call that Eass Mffect Deuce), is absolutely insane.  There is no reason to this.  This is your own personal bias.

Apparently, if someone has a dissenting opinion as yours, and isn't your style/type of fanboy/fangirl, then their opinion is irrelevant, is simply whining, or is some other <insert random negative verb>, beeause you simply can't understand that.

Thanks for proving to me I'm wasting my time on your small, petty world view of a person and their ability to express their opinion on a piece of media.

[Jaron Oberyn]

InvaderErl wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

Seems like typical fanboyism. People don't like others criticizing a game that they love. While it's alright to show a little defense on the matter, going all out like this is uncalled for. I've seen behavior like this on Bungie forums, never thought I'd see it on a Bioware forum. You can't go setting the standard for how people can criticize a video game. Everyone is free to give their own opinion. That's the way it works. Regardless of whether its positive or negative. Attacking someone based on their opinion is bound to give you a bad reputation. This needs to be stopped before it gets out of hand. I've been watching this little convo for a while, and honestly enough is enough. 

 -Polite

To be fair, Smudboy seems to be fishing for these kinds of arguments - he throws out the bait and Ecael responds and they squabble for about 10-20 pages.

Also, in Ecael's defense in his/her (I forget) sig there are threads with ACTUAL constructive criticism and suggestions as oppossed to just internet ****ing videos (which is Smudboy's right of course).

It's Smudboy's right to make those videos. Nobody is making you watch them. They are his opinions on Mass Effect. Just let it be.  Just because he only reviews one game, instead of all video games, doesn't mean his opinion isn't justified.

 -Polite

Modifié par PoliteAssasin, 05 juillet 2010 - 06:17 .

[InvaderErl]

I said its' his right...