Aller au contenu

Photo

Did Bioware get the whole "trilogy concept" wrong? Is the ME games more of 3 seperate games rather than a trilogy?


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
106 réponses à ce sujet

#76
Tinywolf

Tinywolf
  • Members
  • 66 messages

Fhaileas wrote...

(Reposting my post from this thread)



What utter drivel! It’s a horrible second act. The second act is when the problem introduced in the first act gets worse and worse until it looks like all is lost for our heroes at the second act’s conclusion. The proper second act to follow ME1 would be Reapers taking over half the galaxy, exterminating a few of the races you met in the first game, the council being hopelessly lost in their own petty squabbles and trying to save their own races, etc., and things looking their worst right at the end of game. Maybe you have to blow up the Citadel as the Reapers start taking it over, or something like that. And half your crew dies. Roll credits!

I would like to play that kind of game, where you fought a losing fight the whole time, where you won battles but lost the war. You can still do a traditional three-act structure within my nightmare vision of the second game, but the overall story could be about you losing everything you were counting on to save you. (But you pull something together in the third game.) That would be an interesting story! But of course, they couldn’t do a crazy thing like that.

 


nice idea on paper, would be hard to do in theory, how many times has movies done this where the heroes are in a bad way, only to in the next movie have some contrived method of rescue.   Better to just have all that excitment in the next one (hopefully :D).  Anyway the ending to ME2 did leave me very concerned, watch the last minute again and tell me you arnt concerned :P.

#77
Fhaileas

Fhaileas
  • Members
  • 466 messages

Tinywolf wrote...

nice idea on paper, would be hard to do in theory, how many times has movies done this where the heroes are in a bad way, only to in the next movie have some contrived method of rescue.   Better to just have all that excitment in the next one (hopefully :D).  Anyway the ending to ME2 did leave me very concerned, watch the last minute again and tell me you arnt concerned :P.


Unfortunately no. At the end of the second game, the Reapers are out in dark space coming in towards the galaxy. If they'd actually flown over a colony and begun abducting people for their internal slushy machines then yes it might have been a nice cliffhanger that left me in trepidation. But they didn't. It wasn't new information, we already knew that the Reapers were out in dark space (being that they were too stupid to provide themselves with another garage door opener: read Citadel). Sure, now we've actually seen them but we knew they were coming eventually. It is a trilogy after all, the final act has to involve them trying to eat the galaxy somehow and Shepherd stopping them. 

Despite Bioware touting it as such, the ending of ME2 does not count as dark in any sense, in more ways than one it's a cop out on their promise. Especially after they compared it to Empire Strikes Back. (Note: this is a Bioware comparison, not one that I am making, people seem to keep missing that.) Well, the entire game is a cop out but that's already been debated to death. 

There were plenty of ways to make the ending dark. 1) Have the Collectors abduct either Kaiden or Ashley (depending on which one survived) and either convert or indoctrinate them in such a way that you are forced to kill them on the Collector base (or they will kill you). Double points if you use that as an example of what was going to happen to Shephard when they captured her/him. Triple if you do it in such a way that truly messes with Shephard's head. 

2) Have any party member who is not loyal to you when on the Dead Reaper become indoctrinated while on board and you are forced to kill them (or you die).

3) No matter how fast you get there you cannot save the Normandy crew.

4) Shephard destroying the base was actually a catalyst that the Reaper's needed all along to open a second jump gate (or send a signal that reactivates the Citadel) and have the entire Reaper fleet enter our galaxy. The Reapers have been playing Shephard all along. 

5) No matter what choices you make or upgrades you did there is no way for all your team members to survive the final assault on the Collector Base, the more you do the fewer die but you cannot save them all (or even most of them). And you should get an achievement if you managed to kill all of them off (on the same hand it should be difficult to do this). Just like you should if you fail ME 2's suicide mission.

6) Get rid of the human slushy machine and instead have the Collectors converting the humans they've taken into Reaper servants (read not husks) to send out as sleeper agents to begin deactivating the galaxy's defenses. But they are covering this by transforming the other colonists into husks as mindless foot soldiers and weapons of mass destruction. Then this becomes a plot thread in the third game.

7) Have one of the team members you collected already be an indoctrinated servant who turns on you at the last moment, killing Shepherd just as she has completed her mission. Have it on a rotating basis so the player cannot intentionally kill that person when they replay the game. (Don't reveal this in the player's guide) In the same vein, a writer could also make them turn on you at the Collector Base.

8) Do the Lazarus Project at the beginning of the third game instead of the second, leaving the player with the realization that Shepherd has died right as the Reapers are invading the galaxy. Bonus points if you have the Reapers clone Shepherd and fake out the player at the beginning of the third game with a Shepherd clone acting as the Reaper's messiah. Even more if Shepherd's remains were recovered by the Geth and that they are the first beings Shepherd sees when she/he wakes up (though not the only ones who brought Shepherd back). Stage One will be getting rid of Bionic Shepherd, Stage Two will be wiping out the Reapers. 

9) Have the Reapers shut down all technology based on the Mass Effect drives (not just the drives themselves.) They should be completely capable of doing it. This will explain why the guns now need ammunition as they must revert to an older and simpler kind of technology.

10) Etc. Etc. Etc.

There are many more possibilities, it just requires that the writers be cruel capricious gods of their universe. These are options that are actually dark and not that difficult to implement into the already existing structure of the story. There also might be ways to do it so that the player doesn't feel cheated but if you do it well enough, you can always say that they'll get their revenge in the third game because after all: that's what trilogies are about. But if you want to be dark and have consequences one must do it in a way that there are no take backs, which is why every single decision made about the story should be evaluated and plotted out so that it works within the whole of the narrative. When the story is cohesive, people will still complain but they will have less to complain about.

#78
Tinywolf

Tinywolf
  • Members
  • 66 messages
your points are good ones however, and I do agree that ME2 was not dark in any real sense, however while cliffhanger endings are great and all, it still needs to be resolved. I do have a few things to say about same of the points you made

2) Shep and Co werent really on there long enough for indoctrination, and as we have been shown in both games that it does take same time.

3 & 5) I argree same team members needed to die at same point to really hit the nail on the head.

4) the only issue is that the reapers would have had to have a plan before ME1 for shep to do what he did, and it would be hard to imagine that blowing up a base would provide enough juice to power a big nasty relay.

6) this however wouldnt help the reapers get in the galaxy any faster (I know Im assuming here but I think its safe to say that the human reaper is built to acccomplish this).

7 & 8) Killing of shep at the end of ME2 wont work, as firstly there would be no body (therefore the ending would have to be changed). Is also really counter-productive as we know that shep would be back in ME3 so it wouldnt hit any real emotional level

9) This would be the end of the series as the reapers would had just won, considering that everyones technology off based of Mass effect tech, everyone would be back in the stone age.

Modifié par Tinywolf, 29 août 2010 - 01:54 .


#79
crimzontearz

crimzontearz
  • Members
  • 16 789 messages
killing shepard/kidnapping shepard/killing the whole crew/et similia at the end of the final mission screws chances for post play DLC



that is plain dumb, Bioware learned that with ME1, let's not start stepping backwards please

#80
Tinywolf

Tinywolf
  • Members
  • 66 messages
not really, you could have DLC that is set before the final mission

#81
tertium organum

tertium organum
  • Members
  • 59 messages
Excellent posts, Fhaileas.

#82
JJ Long

JJ Long
  • Members
  • 146 messages

What utter drivel! It’s a horrible second act. The second act is when the problem introduced in the first act gets worse and worse until it looks like all is lost for our heroes at the second act’s conclusion. The proper second act to follow ME1 would be Reapers taking over half the galaxy, exterminating a few of the races you met in the first game, the council being hopelessly lost in their own petty squabbles and trying to save their own races, etc., and things looking their worst right at the end of game. Maybe you have to blow up the Citadel as the Reapers start taking it over, or something like that. And half your crew dies. Roll credits!



I would like to play that kind of game, where you fought a losing fight the whole time, where you won battles but lost the war. You can still do a traditional three-act structure within my nightmare vision of the second game, but the overall story could be about you losing everything you were counting on to save you. (But you pull something together in the third game.) That would be an interesting story! But of course, they couldn’t do a crazy thing like that.




That didn't happen in The Two Towers in the LOTR trilogy. In fact, none of the main characters died in TTT. And they win the Battle at the end.

In TTT they faced overwhelming odds at Helms Deep and WIN. The main characters all survive.

You Fail EPICLY

#83
Admiral Awsome

Admiral Awsome
  • Members
  • 44 messages

Fhaileas wrote...

Tinywolf wrote...

nice idea on paper, would be hard to do in theory, how many times has movies done this where the heroes are in a bad way, only to in the next movie have some contrived method of rescue.   Better to just have all that excitment in the next one (hopefully :D).  Anyway the ending to ME2 did leave me very concerned, watch the last minute again and tell me you arnt concerned :P.


Unfortunately no. At the end of the second game, the Reapers are out in dark space coming in towards the galaxy. If they'd actually flown over a colony and begun abducting people for their internal slushy machines then yes it might have been a nice cliffhanger that left me in trepidation. But they didn't. It wasn't new information, we already knew that the Reapers were out in dark space (being that they were too stupid to provide themselves with another garage door opener: read Citadel). Sure, now we've actually seen them but we knew they were coming eventually. It is a trilogy after all, the final act has to involve them trying to eat the galaxy somehow and Shepherd stopping them. 

Despite Bioware touting it as such, the ending of ME2 does not count as dark in any sense, in more ways than one it's a cop out on their promise. Especially after they compared it to Empire Strikes Back. (Note: this is a Bioware comparison, not one that I am making, people seem to keep missing that.) Well, the entire game is a cop out but that's already been debated to death. 

There were plenty of ways to make the ending dark. 1) Have the Collectors abduct either Kaiden or Ashley (depending on which one survived) and either convert or indoctrinate them in such a way that you are forced to kill them on the Collector base (or they will kill you). Double points if you use that as an example of what was going to happen to Shephard when they captured her/him. Triple if you do it in such a way that truly messes with Shephard's head. 

2) Have any party member who is not loyal to you when on the Dead Reaper become indoctrinated while on board and you are forced to kill them (or you die).

3) No matter how fast you get there you cannot save the Normandy crew.

4) Shephard destroying the base was actually a catalyst that the Reaper's needed all along to open a second jump gate (or send a signal that reactivates the Citadel) and have the entire Reaper fleet enter our galaxy. The Reapers have been playing Shephard all along. 

5) No matter what choices you make or upgrades you did there is no way for all your team members to survive the final assault on the Collector Base, the more you do the fewer die but you cannot save them all (or even most of them). And you should get an achievement if you managed to kill all of them off (on the same hand it should be difficult to do this). Just like you should if you fail ME 2's suicide mission.

6) Get rid of the human slushy machine and instead have the Collectors converting the humans they've taken into Reaper servants (read not husks) to send out as sleeper agents to begin deactivating the galaxy's defenses. But they are covering this by transforming the other colonists into husks as mindless foot soldiers and weapons of mass destruction. Then this becomes a plot thread in the third game.

7) Have one of the team members you collected already be an indoctrinated servant who turns on you at the last moment, killing Shepherd just as she has completed her mission. Have it on a rotating basis so the player cannot intentionally kill that person when they replay the game. (Don't reveal this in the player's guide) In the same vein, a writer could also make them turn on you at the Collector Base.

8) Do the Lazarus Project at the beginning of the third game instead of the second, leaving the player with the realization that Shepherd has died right as the Reapers are invading the galaxy. Bonus points if you have the Reapers clone Shepherd and fake out the player at the beginning of the third game with a Shepherd clone acting as the Reaper's messiah. Even more if Shepherd's remains were recovered by the Geth and that they are the first beings Shepherd sees when she/he wakes up (though not the only ones who brought Shepherd back). Stage One will be getting rid of Bionic Shepherd, Stage Two will be wiping out the Reapers. 

9) Have the Reapers shut down all technology based on the Mass Effect drives (not just the drives themselves.) They should be completely capable of doing it. This will explain why the guns now need ammunition as they must revert to an older and simpler kind of technology.

10) Etc. Etc. Etc.

There are many more possibilities, it just requires that the writers be cruel capricious gods of their universe. These are options that are actually dark and not that difficult to implement into the already existing structure of the story. There also might be ways to do it so that the player doesn't feel cheated but if you do it well enough, you can always say that they'll get their revenge in the third game because after all: that's what trilogies are about. But if you want to be dark and have consequences one must do it in a way that there are no take backs, which is why every single decision made about the story should be evaluated and plotted out so that it works within the whole of the narrative. When the story is cohesive, people will still complain but they will have less to complain about.


These are some great ideas. I don't how many of you have seen this post: http://social.biowar...5/index/1703573, but I thought this would have been a better idea, too.

#84
SmokePants

SmokePants
  • Members
  • 1 121 messages

Fhaileas wrote...

The trilogy concept is also known as the three act structure which is the standard in drama. It dates back to Aristotle and is seen in everything from Shakespeare to the latest summer block buster. The three act structure is the most widely used because it is the most logical. Reduced to its simplest, the three act structure says a story must have a beginning, middle, and end. 

ME was "meant" to conform to these conventions as per Casey Hudson:

"As a trilogy we have our three acts. So Mass Effect 2 is the dark act. It's an opportunity to really explore the tougher, more brutal parts of the universe," producer Casey Hudson told IGN. "They say in the first act you put a guy in the tree, in the second act you throw rocks at him, and in the third act you get him down."

Three acts isn't logical, it is simply popular. There is no advantage to three acts vs 1 or 2 or 4 or 5. It is entirely arbitrary. What's wrong with beginning-end or beginning-middle-middle-end? Who needs linearity? We can do Middle-Beginning-End if we want. It does not matter a damn bit.

Clearly, when one applies the three act system to a trilogy, one is using it more metaphorically than literally. Each installment of a trilogy SHOULD have a complete story arc of its own -- however many acts that might be. Otherwise, each work can hardly be called a work. You don't see directors taking a 3-act play, dividing it into 3 plays and calling it a trilogy. That's just absurd. If you insist on three acts, then that trilogy had better have 9. That is only logical.

#85
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 428 messages

Fhaileas wrote...

There were plenty of ways to make the ending dark. 1) Have the Collectors abduct either Kaiden or Ashley (depending on which one survived) and either convert or indoctrinate them in such a way that you are forced to kill them on the Collector base (or they will kill you). Double points if you use that as an example of what was going to happen to Shephard when they captured her/him. Triple if you do it in such a way that truly messes with Shephard's head. 

2) Have any party member who is not loyal to you when on the Dead Reaper become indoctrinated while on board and you are forced to kill them (or you die).

3) No matter how fast you get there you cannot save the Normandy crew.

4) Shephard destroying the base was actually a catalyst that the Reaper's needed all along to open a second jump gate (or send a signal that reactivates the Citadel) and have the entire Reaper fleet enter our galaxy. The Reapers have been playing Shephard all along. 

5) No matter what choices you make or upgrades you did there is no way for all your team members to survive the final assault on the Collector Base, the more you do the fewer die but you cannot save them all (or even most of them). And you should get an achievement if you managed to kill all of them off (on the same hand it should be difficult to do this). Just like you should if you fail ME 2's suicide mission.

6) Get rid of the human slushy machine and instead have the Collectors converting the humans they've taken into Reaper servants (read not husks) to send out as sleeper agents to begin deactivating the galaxy's defenses. But they are covering this by transforming the other colonists into husks as mindless foot soldiers and weapons of mass destruction. Then this becomes a plot thread in the third game.

7) Have one of the team members you collected already be an indoctrinated servant who turns on you at the last moment, killing Shepherd just as she has completed her mission. Have it on a rotating basis so the player cannot intentionally kill that person when they replay the game. (Don't reveal this in the player's guide) In the same vein, a writer could also make them turn on you at the Collector Base.

8) Do the Lazarus Project at the beginning of the third game instead of the second, leaving the player with the realization that Shepherd has died right as the Reapers are invading the galaxy. Bonus points if you have the Reapers clone Shepherd and fake out the player at the beginning of the third game with a Shepherd clone acting as the Reaper's messiah. Even more if Shepherd's remains were recovered by the Geth and that they are the first beings Shepherd sees when she/he wakes up (though not the only ones who brought Shepherd back). Stage One will be getting rid of Bionic Shepherd, Stage Two will be wiping out the Reapers. 

9) Have the Reapers shut down all technology based on the Mass Effect drives (not just the drives themselves.) They should be completely capable of doing it. This will explain why the guns now need ammunition as they must revert to an older and simpler kind of technology.

10) Etc. Etc. Etc.

There are many more possibilities, it just requires that the writers be cruel capricious gods of their universe. These are options that are actually dark and not that difficult to implement into the already existing structure of the story. There also might be ways to do it so that the player doesn't feel cheated but if you do it well enough, you can always say that they'll get their revenge in the third game because after all: that's what trilogies are about. But if you want to be dark and have consequences one must do it in a way that there are no take backs, which is why every single decision made about the story should be evaluated and plotted out so that it works within the whole of the narrative. When the story is cohesive, people will still complain but they will have less to complain about.



1) I like, though I'd say leave him/her alive to menace Shepard in ME 3.  that would A) give Shep a personal motivation to find a way to defeat indoctrination. B) Provide a personal antagonist for the third game and C) Show just how physically wounded/seriously cold Shep can be if forced to kill said person.  WOuld add an extra level of drama also if the player's LI went "dark side" at the end of ME 2.

2) I could go for, but unfortunately I don't believe indoctrination works that quickly

3) Eh, I never got too attatched to the Normandy crew, save maybe Chakwas.  More would have had to be done to personalize the crew to provide the proper emotional punch.

4) That would be cool.  I would have thought the whole Collector Base was a red herring, and the real base was elsewhere, working on a dark space relay to bring the Reapers back Shep doesn't realize this until the very end. 

5) I don't think I'd like it to be impossible, but very very difficult.  There should have been a lot more challenges, and a lot harder to find the right person for the right job.  Maybe split the party into several squads to tear through different parts of the base, and each squad would need certain specialists to avoid deaths.  It should have been easy to get out with some of the squad, but almost (though not quite) impossible to get out with all of them

6) This makes a ton of sense.  It actually sounds a lot like the Reaper strategy Vigil described in ME 1, sending indoctrinated refugees to wreak havok on planets before they invaded themselves. 

7) I don't think I'd like this one.  Shep's already died once.  Repetition would only further cheapen death in the game (since this trilogy is "Shepard's Story" they'd have to bring him or her back again for ME 3)

Now if it was done more in the way that the Reapers have been manipulating both Shep and TIM through an agent on the Normandy (particularly Miranda or Jacob, or even EDI) I could go for that.

8) I actually thought ME 2 would have flowed better if Shep died at the end of ME 1.  I suppose it could have worked at the end of ME 2 instead.  Like the idea of the geth bringing Shep back.  Not so wild about the idea of a clone working for the Reapers.  Though I suppose it could put a whole new spin on the phrase "I am the Vanguard of your destruction!"Posted Image

9) Nah, this would interfere with my theory that the only way to stop the Reapers would be the destruction of the Mass Relay networkPosted Image

Overall, I like a lot of these ideas.  It makes me sad to see how many opportunities were wasted on the story.

#86
Moiaussi

Moiaussi
  • Members
  • 2 890 messages

Tinywolf wrote...

not really, you could have DLC that is set before the final mission


The romance with Kelly would have to have been moved....

#87
kidbd15

kidbd15
  • Members
  • 1 142 messages
I believe BioWare did mess up a little bit. The story is still good, but it just never felt 100% right; something always seemed missing. After playing the second game, it felt ME2 was just a stepping stone or a ME1.5, and that the entire story could really be told in ME1 and ME3. A lot of the points Fhaelius wrote are good, and would have made for a darker game that felt more complete.



The way I think about a great second act is how Spider-Man 2 and the Dark Knight did it. In Spider-Man 2, Peter goes through a personal struggle that he must overcome. We really felt engaged with his story and his personal conflicts, feelings I did not share with Shepard in ME2.



The Dark Knight goes more along the lines of that REALLY dark second act. In the Dark Knight (Dark Knight spoilers), Batman makes a choice of saving Rachelle, but he's tricked. This would have been a good personal moment for Shepard, choosing to save a friend or thousands of others. The whole trick scheme could work here too, but it's not necessary, the decision alone could go a long way. Furthermore, in the Dark Knight, Batman ends up being a fugitive. This is actually what I expected to happen in ME2, that by the end of the second act, Shepard would be on the run from the Alliance and the Council, and in the third act he would fight off other Spectres, while also fighting to save the galaxy from the Reaper threat.



It's easy to think in retrospect, but I believe the third novel that was just released about Paul Grayson should have been set prior to the second game, and that Grayson was a Reaper agent that we faced in ME2. He would be working in the shadows most of the game while Shepard fought the Collectors, and ultimately would be a main reason why a lot of your crew members die, and why you are on the run from the Alliance and Council (maybe he somehow frames Shepard for the colony abductions and killing colonies of other species, which would be believable because the Council already knows he is working with Cerberus).



BUT alas, we are at the mercy of BioWare and THEIR story that we can only manipulate slightly. I am looking forward to what they have in store for us...

#88
AdamNW

AdamNW
  • Members
  • 731 messages

Mike2640 wrote...

I don't think it wouldn't be nearly as big an issue if Bioware hadn't gone on about it being an "Epic Trilogy" where every choice has dire consequences. They sold it that way, and it was only way after the game was released did they start with the whole Stand-Alone Trilogy talk.
So it's not that they got it wrong, it's that they never intended to "get it right" in the first place, or if they did they abandoned it while making ME2.

This.

#89
kidbd15

kidbd15
  • Members
  • 1 142 messages

AdamNW wrote...

Mike2640 wrote...

I don't think it wouldn't be nearly as big an issue if Bioware hadn't gone on about it being an "Epic Trilogy" where every choice has dire consequences. They sold it that way, and it was only way after the game was released did they start with the whole Stand-Alone Trilogy talk.
So it's not that they got it wrong, it's that they never intended to "get it right" in the first place, or if they did they abandoned it while making ME2.

This.


I think they changed their way of thinking when EA bought them.  Once that happened, EA (or even BW themselves) probably told them that they wanted ME to be on PS3 as well, causing every game to be "stand alone." When ME2 first came out, the reason CH gave about being stand alone was so newcomers to the game wouldn't have to go back to ME1, and could just pick it up from ME2; this is true, but more so for the PS3 users because they can't play ME1, because any 360 or PC user who plays ME2 and liked it will most likely get their hands on ME1, no doubt.  If this had not happened, I'm sure the games would be less stand alone than they are now.

Edit: Along these same lines, it would then make sense as ME2 as the introduction of the franchise to all these new PS3 players.  This would also explain the lack of conflict and personal dilemna in ME2, because the first act is where the protagonist wins (it happened in ME1 for the original fans, and again in ME2 for the new fans).  This could indicate that in the first half of ME3 is when the epic conflict to the main character rises, where the second half is him making his come back and saving the day (to summarize: ME3a is actually our true second act and ME3b is our true third act).  Had ME just been released on all platforms from the beginning, BW would have never had to come up with a crazy way to accomodate new fans.
Now, the other possibility that could happen that I brought up in a previous thread, one which I hope is not the case, is that all of ME3 will be the true second act, and an MMO will conclude the epic battle against the Reapers (ugh, really hope that's not the case).

Modifié par kidbd15, 29 août 2010 - 06:51 .


#90
AdamNW

AdamNW
  • Members
  • 731 messages
Yeah, I do recall Bioware saying they wanted the entire trilogy to be exclusive to the 360.

#91
Tinywolf

Tinywolf
  • Members
  • 66 messages

kidbd15 wrote...


Now, the other possibility that could happen that I brought up in a previous thread, one which I hope is not the case, is that all of ME3 will be the true second act, and an MMO will conclude the epic battle against the Reapers (ugh, really hope that's not the case).


Doubtful as this series is sheps story, so unless their kill off shep before beating off the reapers I cant see that happening

#92
Solaris Paradox

Solaris Paradox
  • Members
  • 401 messages
There is no "how a trilogy should be." Different stories demand different story structures. Confining things to any one structure out of some sense of obligation just limits things.



As it is, the games do feel somewhat stand-alone, but not to an unreasonable extent. Just enough that you can start in the middle and still appreciate ME2 on its own merits. Not enough to blunt the effect of experiencing them both. That's how it felt to me, anyway.

#93
Sajon1

Sajon1
  • Members
  • 69 messages
Where did hudson say they were meant to be stand alone titles?


#94
kidbd15

kidbd15
  • Members
  • 1 142 messages

Sajon1 wrote...

Where did hudson say they were meant to be stand alone titles?


http://www.thegamera...-1000-decisions

Q: Mass Effect 3 was announced some time ago. But
your work on ME2 showed that while the decision structure carried over,
the story itself is fairly separate from the first game. Why is that?

A: All of the the Mass Effect titles standalone. The
beginning of Mass Effect 2 is really meant to let players experience
Mass Effect for the first time. We really want to look at Mass Effect 3
as a standalone title where the ending is going to feel satisfying.


For some reason I don't like how he says just "satisfying."  I don't want to just feel satisfied with the ending, I want to be down right awe struck by the ending. 

Modifié par kidbd15, 29 août 2010 - 09:38 .


#95
Repzik

Repzik
  • Members
  • 150 messages
Comparing the Mass Effect trilogy to the original Star Wars trilogy is silly. Star Wars has less drawn out recruitment parts and other such nonsense because each movie is less than three hours, while each Mass Effect game can take about 24 hours or more to complete.

Modifié par Repzik, 29 août 2010 - 09:42 .


#96
didymos1120

didymos1120
  • Members
  • 14 580 messages

kidbd15 wrote...

For some reason I don't like how he says just "satisfying."  I don't want to just feel satisfied with the ending, I want to be down right awe struck by the ending. 


You really expect him to go around saying stuff like "You shall be downright AWESTRUCK!"  in interviews?  That's just asking for it. 

#97
crimzontearz

crimzontearz
  • Members
  • 16 789 messages

Tinywolf wrote...

not really, you could have DLC that is set before the final mission


post play DLC not "sometime before the final mission" DLC

people like to have something else to do AFTER the final mission, that was one of the largest complaints about ME1

#98
Fhaileas

Fhaileas
  • Members
  • 466 messages

SmokePants wrote...

Fhaileas wrote...

The trilogy concept is also known as the three act structure which is the standard in drama. It dates back to Aristotle and is seen in everything from Shakespeare to the latest summer block buster. The three act structure is the most widely used because it is the most logical. Reduced to its simplest, the three act structure says a story must have a beginning, middle, and end. 

ME was "meant" to conform to these conventions as per Casey Hudson:

"As a trilogy we have our three acts. So Mass Effect 2 is the dark act. It's an opportunity to really explore the tougher, more brutal parts of the universe," producer Casey Hudson told IGN. "They say in the first act you put a guy in the tree, in the second act you throw rocks at him, and in the third act you get him down."

Three acts isn't logical, it is simply popular. There is no advantage to three acts vs 1 or 2 or 4 or 5. It is entirely arbitrary. What's wrong with beginning-end or beginning-middle-middle-end? Who needs linearity? We can do Middle-Beginning-End if we want. It does not matter a damn bit.

Clearly, when one applies the three act system to a trilogy, one is using it more metaphorically than literally. Each installment of a trilogy SHOULD have a complete story arc of its own -- however many acts that might be. Otherwise, each work can hardly be called a work. You don't see directors taking a 3-act play, dividing it into 3 plays and calling it a trilogy. That's just absurd. If you insist on three acts, then that trilogy had better have 9. That is only logical.


Discussing the merits/non-merits of the three act archetype will veer us off topic since the definition I'm providing you with is actually in sync with what Bioware is claiming a trilogy is, and what Mass Effect will be. They're just employing it very badly. Looking at ME2 just in terms of being the middle section of a trilogy,makes it way worse than if it was just stand alone. Having to retcon things in a trilogy to make it work and flow is basically the first sign that something has gone egregiously wrong. A trilogy fundamentally is a preplanned narrative spread over three parts. Part 1 of a trilogy is exposition, it sets up the conflict and sets up the setting. Part 1 is critical because this is creating the ground rules that the rest will be building off of. Part 2 is alternately the buildup, or the preparation phase. Your hero knows who she/he is facing, and is preparing to go after them. Part 3 is the climax, everything hits the fan, and at the end somebody's going home in a blender.

In any trilogy the middle ends up being one of the most (if not the most) important parts. It's the act where all the tragedy happens and either sets up a dark fall or something happens just before the end where you realize it won't be so bad. Since Bioware compared it to Empire Strikes Back, let's take a closer look at the end of the movie:

1) Han Solo has been frozen in carbonite and carried off to Jabba the Hutt
2) Luke has lost his hand, learned that Vader is his father, and his training is still incomplete
3)Luke, Leia, Lando, and Chewie barely escape with their lives. It's only Artoo's discovery of a problem with the Millenium Falcon's hyper drive that allows them to escape from Vader's clutches.
4) Lando's home has been overrun by the Empire.

It reflects a tendency in the structure of Shakespeare's plays. When Shakespeare wrote both tragedies and comedies, the structure remained the same until the final act. Whether funny or terribly sad, something beyond horrible happens. The difference between the two is whether or not it is righted by the end, like in Much Ado About Nothing or continues spiraling out of control like Othello. This is very classic. Bioware doesn't do this.

If Bioware wanted to do a trilogy, they should have ended Mass Effect 2 on a sad note. Not sad whether or not you lose all your party members and you yourself die, but sad in the sense that there is no light in the galaxy and leaves the player going "OMG! HOW AM I GOING TO GET OUT OF THIS?" And leaves you waiting in breathless anticipation for the next game because it threw you off a cliff and left you there.

There is no happy ending to a trilogy's second act because that is not the end of the story. Plenty mechanics are available in learning how to write one, but it should be possible no matter what genre you choose. However, it does require foresight and planning. Bioware has another major problem in the Reapers, that will probably be handled by a deus ex machina in the third game on how you beat them. Because by the sequel you are no closer to knowing how to stop them. However, had they ended the game with you failing to stop the Reapers and with them beginning to take over the galaxy, that would be dark. Then you pick up in the third game as a resistance fighter figuring out how to kick them back out of the galaxy or destroy them forever. There are plenty of legitimate ways to do it, this just wasn't it.

Modifié par Fhaileas, 29 août 2010 - 06:58 .


#99
Fhaileas

Fhaileas
  • Members
  • 466 messages
Thank you for your comments everyone. These are all off the cuff suggestions and I am sure you an many others can come up with better ones. The point is that they could have at least tried to craft a plausibly cogent plot for ME2. A plot only becomes valuable when you can crack it over the head, take it apart and see how it works. When it still holds up after it's bits and pieces have been scattered across the floor through narrative deconstruction, that is when it becomes interesting. The plot of Mass Effect is held together by fairy dust and paper clips. It looks good on the surface and as long as you don't think about it for too long, you might still be able to believe that it's a good story, but once you split it's sides to see what's inside, you realize that there's really nothing there. It doesn't go any deeper than the surface level and while it believes it's something more than it is, it really isn't.

Modifié par Fhaileas, 29 août 2010 - 07:31 .


#100
kidbd15

kidbd15
  • Members
  • 1 142 messages

didymos1120 wrote...

kidbd15 wrote...

For some reason I don't like how he says just "satisfying."  I don't want to just feel satisfied with the ending, I want to be down right awe struck by the ending. 


You really expect him to go around saying stuff like "You shall be downright AWESTRUCK!"  in interviews?  That's just asking for it. 


well I have heard a lot of interviews where directors, producers, actors have said something along the lines of "i think the audience will be blown away."  IMO it just adds a sort of confidence to the movie and the hype surrounding the movie, and it makes it that much more interesting to watch.  The same can be done with games.  When a game director is confident enough in their work to say that it will blow away it's audience, it adds more to the appeal of that game.  If CH is just saying that to not get the hopes of its gamers up, then that's a cop out in itself.  They're setting themselves up for mediocracy so gamers won't expect greatness, and so if the game isn't great, gamers won't be too upset but it never promised to be great.  Yea, we may be setting up ourselves for failure by setting the game up so high, but is that the wrong thing to do with ME and BW?  It really shouldn't be... it's the final game in an epic trilogy... it shouldn't be just satisfying, it should be much more and the developers should be confident enough to say as much, unless of course they are saying it because they KNOW it won't please most people.