2338 réponses à ce sujet

[smudboy]

CROAT_56 wrote...
agreed i've said before its much cheaper to work on getting the ME1-2 SMs as ME3 SMs.  Due to the cost associated with new VAs and Cameo VAs.

If you're a recurring VA, wouldn't you get paid more, as opposed to getting a new VA, who'd get paid less?  Unless everyone just gets paid the same?

And this is just VAing, aka, sound clips.  This doesn't take into account every other asset.  What's the big difficulty with hiring a VA as opposed to another VA?

And on the coding note Polite is very much correct (have a buddy that is studing to be a developer) it is not easy to create new charecters when you have 12 perfectly good ones in front of you.

And what does coding have to do with creating new characters that make it not easy?

(Psst: I'm a developer, but that's irrelevant.)

I am to lazy to do the math but a bulk of the 1000+ variables is who lived and who died.

As in...12?

And Smud when you say a game will not punish its players, we have never had a game where it actually matter (at least not to my knowledge) so it is imposible to say that this game will not disadvantage those who made bad choices in ME2.

Damn not on for a day and this thread jumps 5 pages

The idea is to punish, as opposed to not reward.  That is to say, if you made certain choices in the past two games, those will take away from a key option or beneficial game play element, because you made a certain choice.  That's not how the ME games are structured.  Both P/R outcomes have their own benefits.  Now it may be some characters provide key points, like, a rally call for wartime, perhaps an upgrade here or there.  But that doesn't make them plot integral (which is impossible), nor squadmates (they can die/not even be involved/not have an import.)

[smudboy]

KingDan97 wrote...
You know smud, I would LOVE to see the master's in classic English Literature you apparently have. You seem to think yourself so fit to tear down on every writer who is perceived to be a prime example of good writing by society as a whole. If you don't accept society, leave it. I guarantee your absence won't be mourned by anyone, except perhaps Armond White, who has found someone as stubborn and thick skulled as him.

I don't even know what you're talking about.  I have great respect for all the writers on team MassEffect.

If they can't take some criticism, pop shots, bloody noses and the like, then they're not writers.

In order to be absorbed within a story you must accept a level of suspended disbelief, something you clearly don't grasp.

In ME2 it is true: I do not grasp the suspension of disbelief.  This is because it has destroyed itself.

I hate this argument because I generally consider it to be a trivial defense but if you honestly believe Mass Effect 2's story was such goddamned rubbish, let's see how well you can write, because honestly you don't seem to get that video game storytelling is much different then that of movies, television or literature.

The story is satisfactory.  It is the plot that is rubbish.

I've been published, thanks. 

I want to see you write maybe a page, wherein you show just how well you can write, and then let's see how many little flaws the Bioware community can find within that page in an hour, let alone a day.

No one cares about my writing skills.  It's more than possible, for an amateur, the layman, or even a critic, to make observations, to know what is quality and what is not, to know what they like and dislike and why, by not even being able to be an artist.  I know!  (There's I think two schools of thought in the philosophy of aesthetics, and this is the first.)  Luckily I do know how to write, and edit, and critique writing: that's what creative writing classes teach you.  Any kid can tell you why ME2's plot sucks (or story, however they coin the term.)  In fact I do recall a kid ranting on youtube about how stupid it is, just because they couldn't believe Shepard was resurrected.  Childish, by definition, but still accurate.  You don't need a degree to know what sucks to you, or, more formally, what breaks your suspension of disbelief.

[KingDan97]

Okay so smud, you're both a published writer and a game developer? Could you per chance give the name of one game or otherwise published work that your name is on? Because until then you're blowin hot air.

And breaking YOUR suspension of disbelief does not entitle you to doing everything within your power to attempt to destroy the enjoyment of the game for everyone else involved by constantly touting how much you hate it and how that means it shouldn't be acknowledged.

That stated, the relevance of ME2's characters to the story has no bearing on whether they'll return in ME3. It has been stated many times before that they could easily bring back the old characters from ME2 without penalizing ME3 players. They could easily introduce 4 new characters, that could cover the 6 main classes, and one could even vary on which was the virmire survivor. that would leave you with a varying character. Then you'd have, at the very least, a team of 8 squadmates from the last 2 games. New players would likely have more, with some characters being set as living by default.

To contradict your point of when a character is dead, their story relevance is over, Obi Wan Kenobi, nuff said. Also a character possibly dying isn't necessarily going to mean they can't serve a purpose, it just means a secondary character would need to be written in the event the person meant to fill that person were dead. Or to present an alternative path. Like with Wrex in ME2.

I also believe you meant pot shots... pop shots hold a definition I can't mention on these forums.

I'm also not claiming that Mass Effect doesn't deserve criticism, but it certainly doesn't deserve it merely because someone refuses to accept what they lay down. An example, in your video you complain that Shepard doesn't come back spiritually, that if he were to be brought back that's how it should've happened. Essentially complaining that Bioware didn't fall into cliches and stigmas that surround a type of event. That means that you don't support the evolution of a storytelling element that's become really stagnant.

Modifié par KingDan97, 03 août 2010 - 05:23 .

[smudboy]

KingDan97 wrote...
Okay so smud, you're both a published writer and a game developer? Could you per chance give the name of one game or otherwise published work that your name is on? Because until then you're blowin hot air.

No, because I do not encourage arguments of authority.  Polite, constantly reminding us he 'knows' doesn't make his argument any better or valid.

And breaking YOUR suspension of disbelief does not entitle you to doing everything within your power to attempt to destroy the enjoyment of the game for everyone else involved by constantly touting how much you hate it and how that means it shouldn't be acknowledged.

How is my opinion attemping to destroy the enjoyment of a game for everyone else involved?  WTF are you talking about?

My beef is with the plot.

That stated, the relevance of ME2's characters to the story has no bearing on whether they'll return in ME3. It has been stated many times before that they could easily bring back the old characters from ME2 without penalizing ME3 players.

And a game shouldn't penalize a player for any reason anyway.

They could easily introduce 4 new characters, that could cover the 6 main classes,

I don't think classes were an issue.  Nearly everyone was a biotic, had tech skills, had an automatic weapon, etc.  The only major difference was whether they had a sniper rifle or not.

and one could even vary on which was the virmire survivor. that would leave you with a varying character. Then you'd have, at the very least, a team of 8 squadmates from the last 2 games. New players would likely have more, with some characters being set as living by default.

Not exactly sure what you're trying to state here.

To contradict your point of when a character is dead, their story relevance is over, Obi Wan Kenobi, nuff said. Also a character possibly dying isn't necessarily going to mean they can't serve a purpose, it just means a secondary character would need to be written in the event the person meant to fill that person were dead. Or to present an alternative path. Like with Wrex in ME2.

Right.  Wreave acts a placeholder for Wrex.  We've mentioned placeholders before.

I also believe you meant pot shots... pop shots hold a definition I can't mention on these forums.

Well color me pickled.

I'm also not claiming that Mass Effect doesn't deserve criticism, but it certainly doesn't deserve it merely because someone refuses to accept what they lay down.

Which means what now?

An example, in your video you complain that Shepard doesn't come back spiritually, that if he were to be brought back that's how it should've happened. Essentially complaining that Bioware didn't fall into cliches and stigmas that surround a type of event. That means that you don't support the evolution of a storytelling element that's become really stagnant.

I don't support the evolution of a storytelling element that's...stagnant?  Umm?

I comment that Shepard doesn't have any exposition on their death.  It was at most a wasted opportunity.  If you're going the medical science route, as in a medical miracle, you have to be a doctor and hit us over the head with science.  No one really likes that, and they simply didn't do that, even though they had to.  Nevermind the poor exposition on how exactly Shepard died, how their body was preserved, and how their brain survived.

They could've easily gone the medical fantasy route, or sci-fantasy, with Unobtainium, some ME fields, etc.  Nada.

A metaphysical or existential take on the human condition, that is, a retrospective on ones life, an internal monologue, is what is classicaly done in times of great duress: sci-fi takes this to the realm of the dying, dead, reincarnated, etc.  If you're not going to teach me about something (science), then you're going to teach me about the human condition.  Again, if it's magic, deus ex or Unobtainium, a guy we can point to who's the Medical God, etc.  It doesn't matter if it's clichéd or unoriginal, so long as it makes sense, and we can buy it.

Anyone who says they understand or bought Shepard's death, preservation and resurrection either wasn't paying attention, is lying, or is a moron.

[KingDan97]

I understood the purpose of Shepard's death. It wasn't intended to further Shepard's plot but to allow for the creation of the gap with the people and groups you had attachments to that allowed you to travel freely through the Terminus Systems. It set up an emotional hook for Mass Effect 3 when you need to regain the loyalty of your Virmire survivor, by proving that you worked with Cerberus for the right reasons. Most importantly it allowed for the gap in time required to set the stage for what was happening with the colonies, in Ascension and many other areas of the galaxy(Wrex, Development of Anderson's position on the Council, Rebuilding of the strength of the Rachni, along with many other things that could easily be vital to ME3.

[Jaron Oberyn]

SmokePants wrote...

"It's very hard." <--- Casey was talking about Mass Effect 2! It was "Very hard" just to get what we got -- cameos, handling characters that may or may not be dead, accounting for every decision. What, you think that was easy? You would have to be the world's biggest idiot to take ME2 for granted and the amount of bending over backwards they had to do to be able to support the ME1 import. And now you're asking them to exponentially and by orders of magnitude increase the complexity like it's what you expect of them.

So, if ME2 was "very hard", where does that leave ME3 as you people envision it? Nigh impossible? Masochistically unfeasible? Prohibitively expensive? Take your damn pick.

Can you seriously not read?

----------------------------------------------------------
There have to be a crazy number of permutations for how you can end your story in Mass Effect 2[/i]. How much of a nightmare is it for you guys to figure out how to address that for Mass Effect 3[/i]? [/b]

It's ... very hard.
----------------------------------------------------------

I can't believe your seriously saying that. Even with the comments from the Bioware dev,

http://img175.images...0185025039.jpg/


Now exactly what do you have to counter this argument? Again - absolutely nothing. 

-Polite

[Il Divo]

smudboy wrote...

A metaphysical or existential take on the human condition, that is, a retrospective on ones life, an internal monologue, is what is classicaly done in times of great duress: sci-fi takes this to the realm of the dying, dead, reincarnated, etc.  If you're not going to teach me about something (science), then you're going to teach me about the human condition.  Again, if it's magic, deus ex or Unobtainium, a guy we can point to who's the Medical God, etc.  It doesn't matter if it's clichéd or unoriginal, so long as it makes sense, and we can buy it.

There's one thing I'm not understanding in this post. Suspension of disbelief is ultimately a threshold. The more elements we find out of place or 'unbelievable' the more likely we break from the narrative and start asking questions. I'm not seeing how anything you post has related to this so far.

If something is extremely cliche`/unoriginal (alot of what we see in Mass Effect), I don't find myself saying 'Oh, it's a literary device (unobtanium) so it's all good'. I still throw my hands up in frustration; my suspension of disbelief is still broken at what I'm seeing because the explanation is really thin or borderline idiotic. 

For example, let's say Bioware had decided to go your route and provided an explanation. Let's say it was very minimalistic. Doctor: "Oh yeah, we found some way to manipulate element zero (unobtanium) to repair the human body and mind". Well, we have our explanation (as you wanted), but I think in some cases the cure is worse than the disease. I prefer not knowing the science to receiving an extremely dumb explanation for it.  

[Jaron Oberyn]

KingDan97 wrote...

Okay so smud, you're both a published writer and a game developer? Could you per chance give the name of one game or otherwise published work that your name is on? Because until then you're blowin hot air.

And breaking YOUR suspension of disbelief does not entitle you to doing everything within your power to attempt to destroy the enjoyment of the game for everyone else involved by constantly touting how much you hate it and how that means it shouldn't be acknowledged.

That stated, the relevance of ME2's characters to the story has no bearing on whether they'll return in ME3. It has been stated many times before that they could easily bring back the old characters from ME2 without penalizing ME3 players. They could easily introduce 4 new characters, that could cover the 6 main classes, and one could even vary on which was the virmire survivor. that would leave you with a varying character. Then you'd have, at the very least, a team of 8 squadmates from the last 2 games. New players would likely have more, with some characters being set as living by default.

To contradict your point of when a character is dead, their story relevance is over, Obi Wan Kenobi, nuff said. Also a character possibly dying isn't necessarily going to mean they can't serve a purpose, it just means a secondary character would need to be written in the event the person meant to fill that person were dead. Or to present an alternative path. Like with Wrex in ME2.

I also believe you meant pot shots... pop shots hold a definition I can't mention on these forums.

I'm also not claiming that Mass Effect doesn't deserve criticism, but it certainly doesn't deserve it merely because someone refuses to accept what they lay down. An example, in your video you complain that Shepard doesn't come back spiritually, that if he were to be brought back that's how it should've happened. Essentially complaining that Bioware didn't fall into cliches and stigmas that surround a type of event. That means that you don't support the evolution of a storytelling element that's become really stagnant.

I can tell you right now that this kid isn't a game developer. And he considers himself a publisher. Ha. I thought he only films complaint videos. That's all I've seen from this kid. I'm 100% sure he isn't in game development, neither does he know the basics of it. 

-Polite

[Jaron Oberyn]

If you read through the posts, you'll see that "love interests will have full fledged roles in ME3 regardless of whether they can die or not.

So again, what now?

edit: according to this, they were considering either writing them off since they could die, or writing them completely. But they'll be keeping Mordin, he may not be a playable character though. But still no decision on to write them off or keep them. But from the looks of it the LI from either mass 1 or mass 2 will have a "full fledged" role in the 3rd game. 

edit 2: further down he says that they're considering keeping non LI squaddies on your ship, but they'll be like Kelly and Joker. They'll be "static" on your ship. And based on his comments, looks like Thane and Samara won't be any of them.


-Polite

Modifié par PoliteAssasin, 03 août 2010 - 06:29 .

[smudboy]

Il Divo wrote...
There's one thing I'm not understanding in this post. Suspension of disbelief is ultimately a threshold. The more elements we find out of place or 'unbelievable' the more likely we break from the narrative and start asking questions. I'm not seeing how anything you post has related to this so far.

Well for one I wasn't intending to show how the death, preservation and resurrection of Shepard was unbelievable in that post.

If something is extremely cliche`/unoriginal (alot of what we see in Mass Effect), I don't find myself saying 'Oh, it's a literary device (unobtanium) so it's all good'. I still throw my hands up in frustration; my suspension of disbelief is still broken at what I'm seeing because the explanation is really thin or borderline idiotic. 

Nonsense.  Every story uses plot devices and literary tools, heck even the same themes, stereotypes and basic ideas.  It's not that they're there (the content), it's how they're used that's important (the context).  If an extremely clichéd story is told well, meaning a 6 year old can understand it, that's a good story.  You might not like it, and you'll probably get bored or roll your eyes over it because you've "seen it all before", but it's perfectly acceptable.  It's when such plot devices are reduced purely to a plot device (like Shepard dying, like the magical shuttle ride), that our suspension of disbelief is gone.  This is why we have things like exposition, buildup, history, explanation, and other use of storytelling devices.

For example, let's say Bioware had decided to go your route and provided an explanation. Let's say it was very minimalistic. Doctor: "Oh yeah, we found some way to manipulate element zero (unobtanium) to repair the human body and mind". Well, we have our explanation (as you wanted), but I think in some cases the cure is worse than the disease. I prefer not knowing the science to receiving an extremely dumb explanation for it.  

If BioWare properly explained it, I'd have something to refer to, point at, etc. 

Anything which clarifies the narrative is the best thing in the universe of the narrative, where a story is concerned.  To think it worse simply because it's Unobtainium...?  Man, you'd have stopped reading fiction, listening to stories a long time ago.

Modifié par smudboy, 03 août 2010 - 06:28 .

[smudboy]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

SmokePants wrote...

"It's very hard." <--- Casey was talking about Mass Effect 2! It was "Very hard" just to get what we got -- cameos, handling characters that may or may not be dead, accounting for every decision. What, you think that was easy? You would have to be the world's biggest idiot to take ME2 for granted and the amount of bending over backwards they had to do to be able to support the ME1 import. And now you're asking them to exponentially and by orders of magnitude increase the complexity like it's what you expect of them.

So, if ME2 was "very hard", where does that leave ME3 as you people envision it? Nigh impossible? Masochistically unfeasible? Prohibitively expensive? Take your damn pick.

Can you seriously not read?

----------------------------------------------------------
There have to be a crazy number of permutations for how you can end your story in Mass Effect 2[/i]. How much of a nightmare is it for you guys to figure out how to address that for Mass Effect 3[/i]? [/b]

It's ... very hard.
----------------------------------------------------------

I can't believe your seriously saying that. Even with the comments from the Bioware dev,

http://img175.images...0185025039.jpg/


Now exactly what do you have to counter this argument? Again - absolutely nothing. 

-Polite

Maybe you could reiterate your point, cause I don't even understand what you're saying we should be understanding.  Let's believe I, and everyone else, seriously cannot understand.  So what are you trying to say here?

[smudboy]

PoliteAssasin wrote...
I can tell you right now that this kid isn't a game developer. And he considers himself a publisher. Ha. I thought he only films complaint videos. That's all I've seen from this kid. I'm 100% sure he isn't in game development, neither does he know the basics of it. 

-Polite

Feel free to test my knowledge of software development cycles, starting up an incorporated business, quaternion mathematics, color theory, narrative, storyboarding, design principles, level design, 3D modeling software explot toolsets, UVW mapping, keyframing, light and texture maps, shader technology, game and rendering loops, A* tree data structures, OO design, the Unreal 2k3/4 IDE...

Really, test away chief.  Blow me out of the water.

And yes I was published in a student anthology.  Yes it was a short story.  Yes it was sci-fi.  You won't find it on any bookstore. It was a limited print.  And yes it has an ISBN.

[KingDan97]

smudboy wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

SmokePants wrote...

"It's very hard." <--- Casey was talking about Mass Effect 2! It was "Very hard" just to get what we got -- cameos, handling characters that may or may not be dead, accounting for every decision. What, you think that was easy? You would have to be the world's biggest idiot to take ME2 for granted and the amount of bending over backwards they had to do to be able to support the ME1 import. And now you're asking them to exponentially and by orders of magnitude increase the complexity like it's what you expect of them.

So, if ME2 was "very hard", where does that leave ME3 as you people envision it? Nigh impossible? Masochistically unfeasible? Prohibitively expensive? Take your damn pick.

Can you seriously not read?

----------------------------------------------------------
There have to be a crazy number of permutations for how you can end your story in Mass Effect 2[/i]. How much of a nightmare is it for you guys to figure out how to address that for Mass Effect 3[/i]? [/b]

It's ... very hard.
----------------------------------------------------------

I can't believe your seriously saying that. Even with the comments from the Bioware dev,

http://img175.images...0185025039.jpg/


Now exactly what do you have to counter this argument? Again - absolutely nothing. 

-Polite

Maybe you could reiterate your point, cause I don't even understand what you're saying we should be understanding.  Let's believe I, and everyone else, seriously cannot understand.  So what are you trying to say here?

The guy in the quoted post(not polite, the center one) thought that Casey Hudson was referring to ME2 when he said the repercussions were "very hard" when in fact he was referring to ME3, as stated in the question preceding the answer. Polite was showing disbelief in that the OP of the quote had believed Casey was referring to ME2. That is all.

[Jaron Oberyn]

KingDan97 wrote...

smudboy wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...

SmokePants wrote...

"It's very hard." <--- Casey was talking about Mass Effect 2! It was "Very hard" just to get what we got -- cameos, handling characters that may or may not be dead, accounting for every decision. What, you think that was easy? You would have to be the world's biggest idiot to take ME2 for granted and the amount of bending over backwards they had to do to be able to support the ME1 import. And now you're asking them to exponentially and by orders of magnitude increase the complexity like it's what you expect of them.

So, if ME2 was "very hard", where does that leave ME3 as you people envision it? Nigh impossible? Masochistically unfeasible? Prohibitively expensive? Take your damn pick.

Can you seriously not read?

----------------------------------------------------------
There have to be a crazy number of permutations for how you can end your story in Mass Effect 2[/i]. How much of a nightmare is it for you guys to figure out how to address that for Mass Effect 3[/i]? [/b]

It's ... very hard.
----------------------------------------------------------

I can't believe your seriously saying that. Even with the comments from the Bioware dev,

http://img175.images...0185025039.jpg/


Now exactly what do you have to counter this argument? Again - absolutely nothing. 

-Polite

Maybe you could reiterate your point, cause I don't even understand what you're saying we should be understanding.  Let's believe I, and everyone else, seriously cannot understand.  So what are you trying to say here?

The guy in the quoted post(not polite, the center one) thought that Casey Hudson was referring to ME2 when he said the repercussions were "very hard" when in fact he was referring to ME3, as stated in the question preceding the answer. Polite was showing disbelief in that the OP of the quote had believed Casey was referring to ME2. That is all.

Exactly. Thanks Dan.

-Polite

[smudboy]

KingDan97 wrote...
The guy in the quoted post(not polite, the center one) thought that Casey Hudson was referring to ME2 when he said the repercussions were "very hard" when in fact he was referring to ME3, as stated in the question preceding the answer. Polite was showing disbelief in that the OP of the quote had believed Casey was referring to ME2. That is all.

Ah, thanks.

Modifié par smudboy, 03 août 2010 - 06:44 .

[theelementslayer]

smudboy wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...
I can tell you right now that this kid isn't a game developer. And he considers himself a publisher. Ha. I thought he only films complaint videos. That's all I've seen from this kid. I'm 100% sure he isn't in game development, neither does he know the basics of it. 

-Polite

Feel free to test my knowledge of software development cycles, starting up an incorporated business, quaternion mathematics, color theory, narrative, storyboarding, design principles, level design, 3D modeling software explot toolsets, UVW mapping, keyframing, light and texture maps, shader technology, game and rendering loops, A* tree data structures, OO design, the Unreal 2k3/4 IDE...

Really, test away chief.  Blow me out of the water.

And yes I was published in a student anthology.  Yes it was a short story.  Yes it was sci-fi.  You won't find it on any bookstore. It was a limited print.  And yes it has an ISBN.

You know, it sounds like you went to a website and then listed everything you found.

First of all, If you were in any way a developer, why wouldnt you show us your work. I know most developers love to show off their work, not because their egotistical but because they are proud of it.

Secondly, again if you were a developer you would know how much time it takes to make new characters, and that is a lot more time then just importing the old ones, making a few tweaks, and saving it. The engine isnt going to change so therefore this is entirely feasible.

Thirdly, the returning VA's arent neccessarily paid more money. Case and Point-

Martin Sheen as Illusive man-New character
Garrus VA-Old character

Im pretty sure Mr. Martin Sheen got paid more

lastly congrats on the book, is it on web so I can read it, Im intrested

[smudboy]

theelementslayer wrote...
You know, it sounds like you went to a website and then listed everything you found.

I was just listing stuff off the top of my head.  Been a while.

First of all, If you were in any way a developer, why wouldnt you show us your work. I know most developers love to show off their work, not because their egotistical but because they are proud of it.

Because I tried and failed?  It's embarassing and still irrelevant.  I do not appeal to arguments of authority.

Secondly, again if you were a developer you would know how much time it takes to make new characters, and that is a lot more time then just importing the old ones, making a few tweaks, and saving it. The engine isnt going to change so therefore this is entirely feasible.

Sure, but every asset is pretty much going to be made anew in the next product anyway.  I've told you this before.  I highly doubt they'll use the same old assets of everything regarding a character.  And if they do, well, people will be pissed (just look at the armor from Ash/Kaidan.)

Thirdly, the returning VA's arent neccessarily paid more money. Case and Point-

Martin Sheen as Illusive man-New character
Garrus VA-Old character

Im pretty sure Mr. Martin Sheen got paid more

lastly congrats on the book, is it on web so I can read it, Im intrested

I'm not too sure on the whole payment/contract issue either.  I do know that cameos would cost significantly less than a fully fledged, story relevant squadmate.

[Jaron Oberyn]

theelementslayer wrote...

smudboy wrote...

PoliteAssasin wrote...
I can tell you right now that this kid isn't a game developer. And he considers himself a publisher. Ha. I thought he only films complaint videos. That's all I've seen from this kid. I'm 100% sure he isn't in game development, neither does he know the basics of it. 

-Polite

Feel free to test my knowledge of software development cycles, starting up an incorporated business, quaternion mathematics, color theory, narrative, storyboarding, design principles, level design, 3D modeling software explot toolsets, UVW mapping, keyframing, light and texture maps, shader technology, game and rendering loops, A* tree data structures, OO design, the Unreal 2k3/4 IDE...

Really, test away chief.  Blow me out of the water.

And yes I was published in a student anthology.  Yes it was a short story.  Yes it was sci-fi.  You won't find it on any bookstore. It was a limited print.  And yes it has an ISBN.

You know, it sounds like you went to a website and then listed everything you found.

First of all, If you were in any way a developer, why wouldnt you show us your work. I know most developers love to show off their work, not because their egotistical but because they are proud of it.

Secondly, again if you were a developer you would know how much time it takes to make new characters, and that is a lot more time then just importing the old ones, making a few tweaks, and saving it. The engine isnt going to change so therefore this is entirely feasible.

Thirdly, the returning VA's arent neccessarily paid more money. Case and Point-

Martin Sheen as Illusive man-New character
Garrus VA-Old character

Im pretty sure Mr. Martin Sheen got paid more

lastly congrats on the book, is it on web so I can read it, Im intrested

Haha just what I was thinking. UT2k3's engine has been outdated, well since 2004. Come on, we're on UE3. He obviously googled up "basics of game design" or something.  Boy you gotta give this kid some credit, he is original. He shows his work, and I'll be more than happy to show my work. 

-Polite

[pvt_java]

smudboy wrote...

KingDan97 wrote...
Okay so smud, you're both a published writer and a game developer? Could you per chance give the name of one game or otherwise published work that your name is on? Because until then you're blowin hot air.

No, because I do not encourage arguments of authority.  Polite, constantly reminding us he 'knows' doesn't make his argument any better or valid.

You've already made this an authority arguement. Tell us what you have worked on.

Modifié par pvt_java, 03 août 2010 - 06:59 .

[smudboy]

pvt_java wrote...

smudboy wrote...

KingDan97 wrote...
Okay so smud, you're both a published writer and a game developer? Could you per chance give the name of one game or otherwise published work that your name is on? Because until then you're blowin hot air.

No, because I do not encourage arguments of authority.  Polite, constantly reminding us he 'knows' doesn't make his argument any better or valid.

You've already made this an authority arguement. Tell us what you have worked on.

...

Where?  In no way do I want my arguments to be seen as that.  I was showing the futility of what Polite was doing, as if saying someone's a specialist, then their current argument means more.

[Jaron Oberyn]

smudboy wrote...

theelementslayer wrote...
You know, it sounds like you went to a website and then listed everything you found.

I was just listing stuff off the top of my head.  Been a while.

First of all, If you were in any way a developer, why wouldnt you show us your work. I know most developers love to show off their work, not because their egotistical but because they are proud of it.

Because I tried and failed?  It's embarassing and still irrelevant.  I do not appeal to arguments of authority.

Secondly, again if you were a developer you would know how much time it takes to make new characters, and that is a lot more time then just importing the old ones, making a few tweaks, and saving it. The engine isnt going to change so therefore this is entirely feasible.

Sure, but every asset is pretty much going to be made anew in the next product anyway.  I've told you this before.  I highly doubt they'll use the same old assets of everything regarding a character.  And if they do, well, people will be pissed (just look at the armor from Ash/Kaidan.)

Thirdly, the returning VA's arent neccessarily paid more money. Case and Point-

Martin Sheen as Illusive man-New character
Garrus VA-Old character

Im pretty sure Mr. Martin Sheen got paid more

lastly congrats on the book, is it on web so I can read it, Im intrested

I'm not too sure on the whole payment/contract issue either.  I do know that cameos would cost significantly less than a fully fledged, story relevant squadmate.

I'll go ahead and engage you on this last sentence. Even with the Bioware writer saying Mass 1 and 2 LI's will have a full fledged role in the 3rd game regardless of if they can die or not, your still on this? And also, please do share some of your work. I'm grabbing a few things I did back in '08. So you do the same. 

-Polite

[theelementslayer]

smudboy wrote...
Because I tried and failed?  It's embarassing and still irrelevant.  I do not appeal to arguments of authority.

Ummmm k? Polite doesnt say he has authority he says experience. Im new to the feild, as I said still a university kid but I do believe that polite is experienced in this feild. Ive talked to other game designers, most notably from Ubisoft Montreal and they know their stuff. Not because they have authority but instead experience.

Sure, but every asset is pretty much going to be made anew in the next product anyway.  I've told you this before.  I highly doubt they'll use the same old assets of everything regarding a character.  And if they do, well, people will be pissed (just look at the armor from Ash/Kaidan.)

The armour of ash was the same from ME1 to ME2, and their faces looked mightily similar. They were tweaked yes, started from scratch, I doubt it. Plus they went through a engine change that time around, this time they wont be.

And I dont know if you mean the fans were mad because of the same armour but Im pretty sure its cause they were cameoed.

Plus why wouldnt they keep the same armour, canadians still use the same "woodland" BDU camo pattern they used 10 years ago. The army doesnt change much or quickly.

I'm not too sure on the whole payment/contract issue either.  I do know that cameos would cost significantly less than a fully fledged, story relevant squadmate.

Yes, no arguments there but what your suggesting is take survivors as cameos and add new squadmates, a whole new team. So lets do some math together

ME2 characters used in ME3

12 squaddies at x amount per
=12x$

now lets say they get paid quarter as much for a cameo apperance and we have a whole new squad of 12

12 Cameos at 1/4x=3x
12 Squaddies at x=12x

15x-More money.

Plus as polite pointed out. Why do you need 2 people to survive when only one pulls you up. There is no possible way to only have one survive. Why, especially when 2 squaddies make up a full team of 3.

[tonnactus]

PoliteAssasin wrote...

If you read through the posts, you'll see that "love interests will have full fledged roles in ME3 regardless of whether they can die or not.

-Polite

They also told something like the old love interests are important in Mass Effect 2 and that shepardt could continue that
romances."Meaningfull camoes". And what the player got at the end?

[Il Divo]

You might not like it, and you'll probably get bored or roll your eyes over it because you've "seen it all before", but it's perfectly acceptable.  It's when such plot devices are reduced purely to a plot device (like Shepard dying, like the magical shuttle ride), that our suspension of disbelief is gone.  This is why we have things like exposition, buildup, history, explanation, and other use of storytelling devices.

And yet, I'd say your first statement is still a problem. If I find myself rolling my eyes at a plot, I'd say my suspension of disbelief has definitely been broken. When I read a good story, I'm engrossed (so to speak) in the events of that story. The same for any game or movie. When I roll my eyes, get bored, etc, I'm pulled out of that story. If I find myself commenting on how cheesy the writing is, how terrible the acting may be (aka Star Wars prequel films), my suspension of disbelief is dying at that moment.  

Anything which clarifies the narrative is the best thing in the universe of the narrative, where a story is concerned.  To think it worse simply because it's Unobtainium...?  Man, you'd have stopped reading fiction, listening to stories a long time ago.

Yes, if most fiction was meant to be viewed as an alternate reality, then I would agree with you. But when I play Dragon Age, I have no illusions that this is a completely imaginary world with completely fake elements. It's a world where anything is possible and I can accept that on its own terms; it shares only certain basic rules with our reality. Ex: If I stab someone with a sword, they will die.

Stories which typically involve Earth as a background setting are somewhat more difficult, particularly science fiction. Mass Effect is a universe which tries to sell itself off as possible. This is our Earth, our history, our culture, etc, only moved forward a century. It doesn't simply share base similarities with fantasy (Dragon Age), it actually relies on everything we've known in our own reality as true.

Therefore, when I see teleportation in the first five minutes of Mass Effect, I'm asking myself how did that happen? What happened to the natural laws, etc? A question which is never satisfactorily addressed beyond element zero, which can be made to account for every element in the story. Light Speed? Element zero. Biotics? Element zero. Asari mind-powers? Element zero. Bipedal aliens who look, act, and feel remarkably human? Probably element zero.

It doesn't matter to me that the characters (Joker, etc) can accept it as true because I need to understand how this development came about in the first place. If Mass Effect is science fiction, it's soft science fiction. Same for Mass Effect 2.  

Modifié par Il Divo, 03 août 2010 - 07:07 .

[smudboy]

PoliteAssasin wrote...
I'll go ahead and engage you on this last sentence. Even with the Bioware writer saying Mass 1 and 2 LI's will have a full fledged role in the 3rd game regardless of if they can die or not, your still on this? And also, please do share some of your work. I'm grabbing a few things I did back in '08. So you do the same. 

-Polite

What's to engage on?  A cameo is simple.  A fully fledged squadmate is complex.  A placeholder would be somewhere in between.