293 réponses à ce sujet

[Soviet Vodka]

You made some good points but alot of it appeared to be rampant nitpicking. More or less along the lines of "What if Vader had decided to order that life pod shot down just for the sake of it? The death star plans never get into rebel hands that way" you must consider, before you are critical of something, what context is it presented in?

[AmstradHero]

Okay, this video... well, I'm not sure where to begin. So, let's just issue a wall of text incoming warning and dive right in...

Virtually the entire first video is a drawn out overview of what happens. There's barely any commentary here just pure fact on the contents of the DLC. We could pretty much ignore the entire video, except for maybe a few points of purely subjective opinion with no rationale or explanation about design decisions you don't like about ME2. That actually has nothing to with LOTSB. If you're doing a LOTSB review, review LOTSB, don't harp on about things that are part of the core mechanics of the game itself that can't be changed by the DLC. It's pointless.

So in the second video we actually start to get to some analysis, though not much. Your first major complaint is that you don't understand Liara's character. For two years, Liara has been living with the guilt of thinking she was responsible for having her friend Feron (seriously, the "Thane" crack is cheap and stupid and has no place if you expect to be taken seriously) is dead because of her. Moreover, the Shadow Broker stole Shepards body and attempted to sell it to the Collectors. Liara came to think of Shepard as a friend and a hero and changed her life dramatically. You expect her to just set that aside? You expect her not to harbour thoughts of revenge against the Shadow Broker for killing and attempting to sell the corpse of her best friends? Also, you touch on one moment about her immaturity - this makes it entirely reasonable that she would undergo an emotional change, especially when combined with the fact that she was somewhat of a recluse without friends before the events of ME1.

Re: Vanguard charge to any location. We should also get a forcefield like the Shadow Broker too. Players should get every ability that our enemies have, because that happens in every game, doesn't it? Oh, wait... no.

The ship run, you might have a point here... but in that case, why didn't we get dropped off right at our destination in ME1 in the Mako? Or in any of the locations in ME2? Shall we just skip right to the end of a level? No. That would not be fun or enjoyable. Games are not about the destination, they are about the journey. If you can't enjoy the journey, then I'm not sure why you're playing. Perhaps there are reasons why we can't land closer to the front of the ship. Do we really have to be drip fed an excuse like "there's nowhere to land"? You've said in some posts here you like to use your imagination... but you can't in this case?

Complaints about guns in cutscenes are really trivial and have been present in the series since its release. I'm a fan of accuracy as much as the next person, but anyone still hung up on this is really just struggling to find a legitimate complaint.

And then you're complaining because your decisions aren't carried over enough. Last time I checked, Mass Effect 2 was the first sequel EVER to allow decisions in a previous game to have an effect on its events. And now they're not good enough? Sorry, but now we've taken a huge detour into Entitlement Avenue.

We reach the "ugly" section... which honestly... makes no sense. The probe thing does seem like a bit of a plot breaker - but it is mentioned that they are remains. That's not a whole probe. Maybe bit of the probe got through. Maybe the shadow broker attached probes to the Collector's vessel at some point? There are a number of possible reasons.  You also mention the dossiers, which oddly enough you seem to approve of, except that you have an issue that you're not getting a full story on every single thing. You seem to have lost sight of what you're actually complaining about here. And I hate to break it to you, but even if that information had been included in the game, you're going to have plenty of people that would not even look at them. Some players don't read a single codex entry. As for hoping BioWare will take something from Alpha Protocol... well, personally I would have to say I would love if some of the design choices from AP were incorporated into other games, but given how badly it was received, I can imagine designers will have an uphill battle with the people providing the funding for development.

The only point where it felt like you were going to make a reasonable comment was when you started talking about Tela Vasir.  I didn't particularly like being railroaded into working for Cerberus, but I don't have the same "it is a vile abomination the ruined ME2" opinion you possess that so blatantly colours this part of your review. I agree it could have been a potentially interesting dialogue had we been given the opportunity to explore it in depth, but given we meet Tela down the barrel of a gun, we're not really able to do that. Heck, you seem to like Liara a lot (or at least her character in ME1), but now you'd be happy to sit down and have chit-chat with someone who wants to kill her? Sometimes interesting characters/antagonists die in stories - but we do actually get an interesting exchange out of Tela before she expires. What would we really gain by her continued existence? We could visit occasionally and complain about our employers and how we hate them, but have to do so for "the greater good"? That doesn't actually sound interesting at all.

I had actually hoped for some reasoned analysis, but all these videos really contain is a series of complaints stemming entirely from personal preference rather than having any real basis in terms of writing, narrative, game design or character development. You're entitled to your personal opinion of course, but to dress it up as a critical analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the LOTSB is somewhat inaccurate, especially considering that you've effectively used this as a soapbox to declare why you don't like ME2.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 26 septembre 2010 - 02:37 .

[Pacifien]

Here's a reminder for anyone who missed it on page 3:

Pacifien wrote...
This is going to be my one and only warning to everybody who posts to this thread.

This is someone's review. He is not forcing you to watch it. If you do watch it, feel free to discuss the points he made in that review. If you start insulting each other, I'll ban you. If you think it's okay to insult someone because they insulted you first, I'll ban both of you. If you insinuate an insult, I'll ban you.

Read the Site Rules which you all agree to abide simply by posting here. No flame wars. Thank you.

ETA: This is not directed at AmstradHero who had the misfortune of simply being the post that preceded mine. His post is fine.

Modifié par Pacifien, 26 septembre 2010 - 02:36 .

[Nightwriter]

Okay, Pacifien, exactly what qualifies as a questionable post for topics like these? Say I have a negative opinion. If I express it will I get a warning? Is it okay as long as I express it civilly and intelligently? What if I'm responding to something kind of ridiculous and I say that it's kind of ridiculous? Is this going into the danger zone as well? Is it better just not to respond at all?

Modifié par Nightwriter, 26 septembre 2010 - 02:37 .

[Nightwriter]

I cannot live in such a world. Do you realize how often the walls would spit papers at me for swearing.

[smudboy]

[quote]AmstradHero wrote...

Virtually the entire first video is a drawn out overview of what happens.
[/quote]
I find it wise to analyze with an objective view, yes.

[quote]
We could pretty much ignore the entire video, except for maybe a few points of purely subjective opinion[/quote]
Could you be more specific?

[quote]
with no rationale or explanation about design decisions you don't like about ME2.
[/quote]
I have devoted two series of vids to analyzing ME2.

[quote]
That actually has nothing to with LOTSB. If you're doing a LOTSB review, review LOTSB, don't harp on about things that are part of the core mechanics of the game itself that can't be changed by the DLC. It's pointless.
[/quote]
I do not review; I analyze.

[quote]
So in the second video we actually start to get to some analysis, though not much.
[/quote]
Exactly what kind of analysis are you in search of?  I like the boring, monotous, objective, anal kind.

[quote]
Your first major complaint is that you don't understand Liara's character. For two years, Liara has been living with the guilt of thinking she was responsible for having her friend Feron
[/quote]
She's also been plotting revenge for two years, which gets swept under the rug.  She's also had all this time to mourn the death of two of her "friends", yet she gets both those people back, all the while seeking the SB whereabouts.  Little did she know all she had to do was put her faith and energy into Cerberus: The Plot Providers.

[quote]
(seriously, the "Thane" crack is cheap and stupid and has no place if you expect to be taken seriously)
[/quote]
Kind of my opinion on their character models of the Drell.  Glad that got through to you.

[quote]
is dead because of her. Moreover, the Shadow Broker stole Shepards body and attempted to sell it to the Collectors. Liara came to think of Shepard as a friend and a hero and changed her life dramatically.
[/quote]
Did she?  I think she does.  She seems more bizarre and awkward since the last time I saw her.  Kind of like a completely different person.  We can infer a whole slew of attitudes and reasons ("I couldn't let you go"), but this gets lampshaded, bordering on bruthsed aside, as soon as a picture of Feron is presented in front of her, which implies a hope of them surviving.  While being tortured all this time.  In their stylish, designer Compact-proletariat outfit.

[quote]
You expect her to just set that aside?
[/quote]
That's exactly what she did.

[quote]
You expect her not to harbour thoughts of revenge against the Shadow Broker for killing and attempting to sell the corpse of her best friends?
[/quote]
Firstly I have many reasons as to why Liara is so nutzoid over Shepard: I just don't know which ones it, or they, are.  Secondly, her obsession with Feron makes little sense, as it sounds like he betrayed her, but that's all we've really got to go under: revenge for what they did to Feron.

[quote]
Also, you touch on one moment about her immaturity - this makes it entirely reasonable that she would undergo an emotional change, especially when combined with the fact that she was somewhat of a recluse without friends before the events of ME1.
[/quote]
All good fodder to interpret what may have happened.  We get no flashbacks, no emotional turmoil of what she went through for two years (hell?  heaven?  paying the bills of boredom?)

[quote]
Re: Vanguard charge to any location. We should also get a forcefield like the Shadow Broker too. Players should get every ability that our enemies have, because that happens in every game, doesn't it? Oh, wait... no.
[/quote]
Oh wait, YES.  As progression continues, Games must excalate game play experiences, not dangle carrots in front of our eyes in the form of mini-boss nemesis that can do whatever I can only better (despite being mortally wounded.)

[quote]
The ship run, you might have a point here... but in that case, why didn't we get dropped off right at our destination in ME1 in the Mako?
[/quote]
The Mako insertion point is dependent on 100 m of open terrain to be dropped from the Normandy that has to enter the low atmosphere of a planet.

The Kodiak can fly anywhere.  Suffice to say, there's a bit of a difference.

[quote]
Or in any of the locations in ME2? Shall we just skip right to the end of a level?
[/quote]
If it raises the question as to why our FLYING MACHINE can't FLY us to the DESTINATION, yes.

[quote]
No. That would not be fun or enjoyable.
[/quote]
Games can be both fun, enjoyable, and not contradict themselves.

[quote]
Games are not about the destination, they are about the journey.
[/quote]
So is my intestinal tract.  Only cellular respiration makes sense.

[quote]
If you can't enjoy the journey, then I'm not sure why you're playing. Perhaps there are reasons why we can't land closer to the front of the ship. Do we really have to be drip fed an excuse like "there's nowhere to land"? You've said in some posts here you like to use your imagination... but you can't in this case?
[/quote]
It's called "good writing."  That scene shows no evidence of telling the audience why.  Welcome to critical analysis.

[quote]
Complaints about guns in cutscenes are really trivial and have been present in the series since its release.
[/quote]
I'm well aware.  It still drives me up the goddamned wall.  We're not handing an intricate object by the hand to another biped to their hand.  We're putting the in game character model into a real-time cutscene the very engine was designed to do, only now due to weapon limitations, characters magically have weapons in their hands they should not, could not, or weren't told to even possess.

[quote]
I'm a fan of accuracy as much as the next person, but anyone still hung up on this is really just struggling to find a legitimate complaint.
[/quote]
Proper weapons in ME cutscenes have ALWAYS BEEN legitimate complaints.

[quote]
And then you're complaining because your decisions aren't carried over enough. Last time I checked, Mass Effect 2 was the first sequel EVER to allow decisions in a previous game to have an effect on its events. And now they're not good enough? Sorry, but now we've taken a huge detour into Entitlement Avenue.
[/quote]
Quest for Glory, Suikoden, Wing Commander come to mind.

I'm not questioning what hey're importing: it's that what is imported has no real value.  One of ME's selling points, I believe.  This goes directly into Liara's character: is she so OC over the SB because she loves Shepard?  Not necessarily, because you might not have romanced her in the first.  "I couldn't let you go, because I love you." <- would have cleared that right up!

[quote]
We reach the "ugly" section... which honestly... makes no sense. The probe thing does seem like a bit of a plot breaker - but it is mentioned that they are remains. That's not a whole probe. Maybe bit of the probe got through. Maybe the shadow broker attached probes to the Collector's vessel at some point? There are a number of possible reasons.
[/quote]
The SB motives and methods are not in question (aside from having non-IFF probes.)  It's the fact he even tried, while Cerberus had us go Pokemon some people and didn't try.

[quote]
You also mention the dossiers, which oddly enough you seem to approve of, except that you have an issue that you're not getting a full story on every single thing. You seem to have lost sight of what you're actually complaining about here.
[/quote]
The dossiers were great: it's a shame stuff like this wasn't in the main game.

[quote]
And I hate to break it to you, but even if that information had been included in the game, you're going to have plenty of people that would not even look at them.
[/quote]
I don't really care about other people.   I mean in relation to what you're talking about.  Flying cars notwithstanding.

[quote]
Some players don't read a single codex entry.
[/quote]
I am one of those players.

[quote]
As for hoping BioWare will take something from Alpha Protocol... well, personally I would have to say I would love if some of the design choices from AP were incorporated into other games, but given how badly it was received, I can imagine designers will have an uphill battle with the people providing the funding for development.
[/quote]
The poor reviews of AP are over it's game play, not it's DSS and plot dynamics.  No other game comes reasonably close.

[quote]
The only point where it felt like you were going to make a reasonable comment was when you started talking about Tela Vasir.  I didn't particularly like being railroaded into working for Cerberus, but I don't have the same "it is a vile abomination the ruined ME2" opinion you possess that so blatantly colours this part of your review.
[/quote]
Watch my Plot Analysis of ME2!

[quote]
I agree it could have been a potentially interesting dialogue had we been given the opportunity to explore it in depth, but given we meet Tela down the barrel of a gun, we're not really able to do that.
[/quote]
We can omni-gel heal a nameless dying Solarian worker; why can't we try and heal up Tela?

[quote]
Heck, you seem to like Liara a lot (or at least her character in ME1), but now you'd be happy to sit down and have chit-chat with someone who wants to kill her? Sometimes interesting characters/antagonists die in stories - but we do actually get an interesting exchange out of Tela before she expires.
[/quote]
Fancy that!

[quote]
What would we really gain by her continued existence? We could visit occasionally and complain about our employers and how we hate them, but have to do so for "the greater good"? That doesn't actually sound interesting at all.
[/quote]
This is only because you have a horrible imagination on this topic.

Tela = Shepard.  She is more relatable to Shepard than any other character, aside from Saren.  Everyone else is looking at Shepard like they're some kind of alien, like the aliens.  Here's a Spectre getting her hands dirty for a 3rd party that just so happens to cross our paths.  Can we P/R her to compromise?  Can we heal her/let her get away?  No; we just blow holes in her after she gives us the best Jean Claude Vanguard Damn impression.

[quote]
I had actually hoped for some reasoned analysis, but all these videos really contain is a series of complaints stemming entirely from personal preference rather than having any real basis in terms of writing, narrative, game design or character development. You're entitled to your personal opinion of course, but to dress it up as a critical analysis of the strengths and weaknesses of the LOTSB is somewhat inaccurate, especially considering that you've effectively used this as a soapbox to declare why you don't like ME2.
[/quote]
I am devilishly sorry for not meeting your expectations.

1. Liara is a mystery, and she gets over her 2 year plot of revenge and mourning because she gets Feron and Shepard back.
2. Shepard is still a brick, but bleeds now and again, and we get to show Liara what color their blood is, in general.
3. Tela was a lost opportunity.
4. The SB was decent.
5. The dialog was good.

There's more, but that's the gist..  With Samara, we have clear stuff to work with.  We're clear on why she's after Morinth, why she likes/dislikes Shepard, and why she turns them down.  With Liara we have "I could't let you go", and "that's why I must defeat the Shadow BRoker", and then we have to look to our experiences in ME1 to speculate, and a series of small questions as to why she's behaving this way, because she's still a completely different character.

[AmstradHero]

Smudboy: To address a few of the points you've raised...

What's to say that TIM didn't try to send probes through the Omega-4 relay? Maybe he did and didn't get anything and so chose not to tell Shepard anything. TIM isn't exactly forthcoming with information most of the time.

The vanguard charge: I think I would lose count if I tried to count every single game where enemies get abilities that the player doesn't. Some enemies are just special. For example, at the end of KoTOR I couldn't drain helpless Jedi to rejuvenate my health and force power. What a failing!  The thing is, I somewhat agree that being able to charge like Tela would potentially be an interesting ability to have. But to complain that an enemy gets an ability that the player doesn't is a little ridiculous. Yes, players need to advance as a game continues, but that doesn't mean they have to get every ability an enemy has.

Perhaps the lightning conductors would affect the Kodiak? There's none of those near where the Kodiak drops us off. Just a thought.

We managed to heal a wounded salarian that got shot once with Omni-gel. Tela has been shot multiple times and absolutely drilled by Shepard and company. She's leaving blood all over the place. Is it any great surprise we can't patch her up?

You seem to have issues with not being explicitly told everything about characters and their backstory, yet accuse me of having a lack of imagination when it comes to possible interactions with Tela Vasir.

To be honest, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree, because a lot of what you're calling analysis comes across as little more than opinion. For one, good writing does not have to explicitly tell the viewer/reader/player everything.  In fact, some of the best writing is that which leaves some elements open to interpretation.

I don't need to be told exactly why Liara is acting differently to how she did in ME1. Her character is changed, and we receive some insights into why, but we're not given lengthy exposition on it, which for me is a good thing. You want to know exactly why, rather than making your own inferences based on the information we are given, which for you makes it a bad thing.

Unfortunately, that's not critical analysis, that's personal preference.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 26 septembre 2010 - 05:13 .

[Heavensrun]

smudboy wrote...


I still want to know exactly in what capacity Liara can't let go of Shepard; her romantic feelings are optional.

No, -your- romantic feelings are optional.  -Hers- form pretty hard and fast, as might be indicated by the number of people who referred to her as too easily infautated in the original game.

Liara falls for Shep almost immediately.  Depending on how you act around her, she lets you -know- that she's infatuated, but there's no reason to assume her feelings change considerably either way, especially given the supplemental material since then.

I'm always kind of mystified by these kind of assumptions.  Just because you do or do not hit on someone has no bearing on their feelings for you.

(Well, I shouldn't say "no bearing".  Some people are suckers for flattery, but that's beside my point!)

Modifié par Heavensrun, 26 septembre 2010 - 04:38 .

[Arijharn]

I think that the lengths that Liara went too for Shephard implies rather strongly that despite potentially your Shephard's feelings, Liara is in love with him. I say that only because I can not personally correlate that fetching someone's body for the express purpose of reanimation can solely lie within the grounds of friendship, although I may be reading too much into it.



I have to agree with Amstrad on some ways in that I don't believe it necessary at all for BioWare's writers to expressly illustrate characters and their intent, to me implication can be more effective if only because it seems more 'realistic.'



As for Tela Vasir; I think it could actually detrimental to allow her to live, with her death we actually risk the wrath of the Council (no matter what your alignment) to a far greater degree than if we left her alive -- in other words, I think the narrative could be much stronger in any future DLC and/or ME3.

[Nightwriter]

I have always liked that Liara's feelings for you are canon, regardless of whether you reciprocate.

[Phaedon]

I don't get why all of your videos have that much negativity, other than that good work.

Modifié par Phaedon, 26 septembre 2010 - 07:22 .

[Goodwood]

Nightwriter wrote...

I have always liked that Liara's feelings for you are canon, regardless of whether you reciprocate.

Goodwood concurs.

[Whereto]

what i would really like to see is a review of MW2 by you smudboy. You will never complain again about any game besides that one

[smudboy]

AmstradHero wrote...
What's to say that TIM didn't try to send probes through the Omega-4 relay? Maybe he did and didn't get anything and so chose not to tell Shepard anything. TIM isn't exactly forthcoming with information most of the time.

The narrative should have made that clear.  If a third party can do the basics, so can our brilliant plot provider.

The vanguard charge: I think I would lose count if I tried to count every single game where enemies get abilities that the player doesn't. Some enemies are just special. For example, at the end of KoTOR I couldn't drain helpless Jedi to rejuvenate my health and force power. What a failing!  The thing is, I somewhat agree that being able to charge like Tela would potentially be an interesting ability to have. But to complain that an enemy gets an ability that the player doesn't is a little ridiculous. Yes, players need to advance as a game continues, but that doesn't mean they have to get every ability an enemy has.

No it's not ridiculous. If a character in a game can do a gameplay maneuver that you can, only toward different targets, and you're of the same capacity, then it's a design flaw.  It's real.  It's happening.  Oh wait, my biotic charge needs a "lock on" or something.  That doesn't make sense.  There is absolutely nothing wrong or technically infeasible about a AOE biotic charge.  Asking for something that's already in the game, and going "why can't I do that awesome thing?"  is not ridiculous: it's obvious.

Perhaps the lightning conductors would affect the Kodiak? There's none of those near where the Kodiak drops us off. Just a thought.

The narrative should have made that clear.

We managed to heal a wounded salarian that got shot once with Omni-gel. Tela has been shot multiple times and absolutely drilled by Shepard and company. She's leaving blood all over the place. Is it any great surprise we can't patch her up?

The narrative should have made that clear.  Especially since she's 100x more important than some random Salallalalarian.

You seem to have issues with not being explicitly told everything about characters and their backstory, yet accuse me of having a lack of imagination when it comes to possible interactions with Tela Vasir.

Yes I tend to have very simple, logical, clear, positive imaginations, which would make the writing be much more obvious and easy to comprehend.

To be honest, I think we're going to have to agree to disagree, because a lot of what you're calling analysis comes across as little more than opinion. For one, good writing does not have to explicitly tell the viewer/reader/player everything.  In fact, some of the best writing is that which leaves some elements open to interpretation.

Nope.  Best writing is always clear.  For example, if she said "I couldn't live without you, because I love you."  That's her reasons.  I can infer other reasons, like her admiring Shepard for being a hero of the galaxy.  All I have are inferences to her motivations as to why she "couldn't let Shepard go", and why she's not freaking out into crazy fangirl mode when she sees a zombie enter her office 2 years later.

I don't need to be told exactly why Liara is acting differently to how she did in ME1. Her character is changed, and we receive some insights into why, but we're not given lengthy exposition on it, which for me is a good thing. You want to know exactly why, rather than making your own inferences based on the information we are given, which for you makes it a bad thing.

I don't want lengthy exposition on it (wait yes I do), I want one goddamned clear answer.

Unfortunately, that's not critical analysis, that's personal preference.

I dont think personal preference = critical analysis either,  but you haven't proven to me that it's that.  What I want it clarity.  That's all.  I don't care what kind.  Therefore it cannot be personal preference.  If a story doesn't give me what I need to know, yet there are possible answers, it's dancing around the issue.  Now, if that dancing (allusions, foreshadowing, providing supposition) beats me over the head, then yes that would be a clear form of storytelling.  But it's not.  Unless this is a murder mystery, where I only am to be shown clues once, and the point of the story is the mystery, then that's fine.  But it isn't.  Liara is a completely different character?  Why?  She's seeking revenge.  Over what?  The death of her friend.  By whom?  The SB.  Oh wait: her friend's alive, and has been tortured for 2 years!  So instead of going into a fuming rage and turning her desk into a coffee cup knowing that her friend didn't die and the SB turned him into his personal plaything, she just drops everything and tries to figure out how to save him, without making a mention of killing or bringing holy retribution on the SB: this is purely a mission of rescue.  But lo and behold, we have to kill the SB anyway because Feron is hooked up to the intranets' death chair.  And they die via explosions through magical white telecommunications lamp fixture fluid torrent.

[smudboy]

Heavensrun wrote...

smudboy wrote...


I still want to know exactly in what capacity Liara can't let go of Shepard; her romantic feelings are optional.

No, -your- romantic feelings are optional.  -Hers- form pretty hard and fast, as might be indicated by the number of people who referred to her as too easily infautated in the original game.

Liara falls for Shep almost immediately.  Depending on how you act around her, she lets you -know- that she's infatuated, but there's no reason to assume her feelings change considerably either way, especially given the supplemental material since then.

I'm always kind of mystified by these kind of assumptions.  Just because you do or do not hit on someone has no bearing on their feelings for you.

(Well, I shouldn't say "no bearing".  Some people are suckers for flattery, but that's beside my point!)

Sure, but then we can say the same of Tali, Ash, and Kaidan.  What made Liara different from them, to go off and try and resurrect Shepard's body/fight the Shadow Broker agents?  What was her real reason?  You don't have to talk to ANYONE on the SR1, but all those people will love you regardless, but Liara's love will make her do insane, ridiculous things like turn into a comic book hero, despite the loyalty of Ash/Kaidan, and the awestruckness of Tali that had amicable dealings with the SB before?

[smudboy]

Arijharn wrote...

I think that the lengths that Liara went too for Shephard implies rather strongly that despite potentially your Shephard's feelings, Liara is in love with him. I say that only because I can not personally correlate that fetching someone's body for the express purpose of reanimation can solely lie within the grounds of friendship, although I may be reading too much into it.

Right.  It can be something so profound she can't put it into words properly.  "You are special to me, more than you will ever know."  Or something like that.  "I couldn't let you go" implies a mental state of not closing a door behind you, of holding onto a dying memory.  What is the reason for doing so?  Love?  Duty?  Honor?  Desperation?  Hope?  Boredom?  Insanity?  Rage?

I have to agree with Amstrad on some ways in that I don't believe it necessary at all for BioWare's writers to expressly illustrate characters and their intent, to me implication can be more effective if only because it seems more 'realistic.'

It depends on how that's expressed.  If the intent is clear, then great.  (Intent is best expressed through, well, literal expression.)  If they've got a few issues and reasons but one is not paramount or dominant, or expressed as such, then we're going "okay so you've got a whole bunch of reasons you feel differently about...?"

As for Tela Vasir; I think it could actually detrimental to allow her to live, with her death we actually risk the wrath of the Council (no matter what your alignment) to a far greater degree than if we left her alive -- in other words, I think the narrative could be much stronger in any future DLC and/or ME3.

How do we risk the Council?  They love Tela, but don't care much for you, and they even know you're working for an avowed enemy of the Council, and re-instated you.  Tela knows how the councillors operate, as Spectres do their dirty work.  Sounds like a perfect tie in to the rebellious/renegade theme of ME2.
Tela: "Yes, I get my info from the SB.  I kill people to save lives."
The Council: "Good work.  Do whatever you think is necessary."

Actually it would've been brilliant if we had all those info networks to choose from (Council, SB, Cerberus, STG, Turian, etc.)

[glacier1701]

AwesomeEffect2 wrote...

Few more things I'd like to add:

During the hostage scene, when telling Vasir that she’ll lose her Specter status for bombing the trade center she replies by saying that she’ll tell the Council that Cerberus did that and that they’ll believe her.
…for real? I mean, would the Council really believe her when they see all that huge pile of dead SB soldiers?

 We have proof already from ME1 that the Council will believe almost anything from their Specters (except if you spell your name S-H-E-P-A-R-D) in that Saren claimed that during Anderson's trial as a potential candidate it was Anderson who messed up things and allowed a whole load of civilians to die when it fact it was Saren who set the whole thing off - that is from Anderson's talk if you press him about his relationship with Saren. Additionally Saren manages to get the investigation into his activities on Eden Prime hung up even though there is strong evidence that non-humans feel that he is hiding something nefarious.

 So in other words - a dead Specter shoot in the back of the head witnessed by a human is not enough to overturn Saren's comment it wasnt me and allowing him to carry on. Besides the SB grunts were not in  uniforms.

[Verit]

smudboy wrote...

AmstradHero wrote...
What's to say that TIM didn't try to send probes through the Omega-4 relay? Maybe he did and didn't get anything and so chose not to tell Shepard anything. TIM isn't exactly forthcoming with information most of the time.

The narrative should have made that clear.  If a third party can do the basics, so can our brilliant plot provider.

I disagree because like you said, sending probes through the relay is something "so obvious and basic" that one can only assume they already tried doing so. While I have issues with ME2's plot, I really don't want to have everything explained to me in that kind of detail.

smudboy wrote...
Bioware did not simply point out the SB was trying to get a ship
through the relay as well.  Where are you getting this massive jump in
logic?  Perhaps?  No, that's not logic.

Occam's Razor. We weren't told the details, so one can only try to come up with the most reasonable explanation as to why the SB was sending probes through the relay. The SB mentions he intended to salvage the remains of the Collector base (if Shepard destroyed it). The SB was also sending probes through the relay. Therefore, I don't think it's a "massive jump in logic" to conclude the SB was finding a way to get a ship through the relay. If you think "the narrative should have made that clear", then I respect that opinion, but:

smudboy wrote...
I have to agree with Amstrad on some ways in that I don't
believe it necessary at all for BioWare's writers to expressly
illustrate characters and their intent, to me implication can be more
effective if only because it seems more 'realistic.'

I have to agree as well.

Modifié par -Draikin-, 26 septembre 2010 - 02:15 .

[smudboy]

-Draikin- wrote...
I disagree because like you said, sending probes through the relay is something "so obvious and basic" that one can only assume they already tried doing so. While I have issues with ME2's plot, I really don't want to have everything explained to me in that kind of detail.

TIM: "Our probes of the relay haven't returned.  So we've been trying other options...we need that IFF..."

Oh.  The detail.

smudboy wrote...
Occam's Razor. We weren't told the details, so one can only try to come up with the most reasonable explanation as to why the SB was sending probes through the relay. The SB mentions he intended to salvage the remains of the Collector base (if Shepard destroyed it). The SB was also sending probes through the relay. Therefore, I don't think it's a "massive jump in logic" to conclude the SB was finding a way to get a ship through the relay. If you think "the narrative should have made that clear", then I respect that opinion, but:

Occam's Razor implies the SB sent probes through the relay to probe it.  Anything on top of that is not Occam's Razor.  The SB has a bajillion sources and contacts all for the purpose of buying/selling/trading intel, and I'd imagine he'd probe a place to gain intel, cause that's what probes do.

We can make a bunch of inferences to his intentions, but it's really not important.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Regarding the probes:



While I find the functionally omniscient Shadow Broker as depicted by the information he has access to in the Dossiers and video archive to be so versimilitude-breaking and poorly-thought out, so rediculous in what those "features" imply, that I've chosen to ignore those aspects of LotSB ENTIRELY... and get on with enjoying the otherwise very good content...



Suppose that SB's people send out several hundred cheap probes, and a few make it back? What's so rediculous about that? Based on what EDI says, the drift at the destination on Mass Relay trips is random (the IFF transponder sets the Relay to a more accurate mode for whatever ship is carrying it, it seems). Send several hundred of probes through, some will end up arriving safely. Most of those will be damaged by the debris, or destroyed by the Oculus swarm. That a few made it back through the relay with partial damage... not that surprising, is it?

[AmstradHero]

smudboy wrote...
my biotic charge needs a "lock on" or something.  That doesn't make sense.  There is absolutely nothing wrong or technically infeasible about a AOE biotic charge.  Asking for something that's already in the game, and going "why can't I do that awesome thing?"  is not ridiculous: it's obvious.

Simple question: How does the player determine HOW FAR they should charge when they're using charge over a piece of cover and hence can't see the ground behind it?
And maybe it was just me, but I could have sworn that Tela ended up at set locations rather than charging to any arbitrary point on the ground...
(This is what I mean when I mention technical and design considerations. Think about how the game can be programmed and potential issues the player might face while playing it. It's not as simple as "the effect is already in the game, so players should get it".)

Tela has been shot multiple times and absolutely drilled by Shepard and company. She's leaving blood all over the place. Is it any great surprise we can't patch her up?

The narrative should have made that clear.  Especially since she's 100x more important than some random Salallalalarian.

Exactly how much blood do you need to see in order to accept that someone is going to die? What, did you want someone to say "she's lost too much blood, we can't save her"? You know, I seem to recall comments about how much blood she'd lost anyway. As Tela is having her final conversation with you, she is a mess. I didn't think for a second that she was ever going to live.

Nope.  Best writing is always clear. 

You're confusing clear with "being explicitly told"...

I don't want lengthy exposition on it (wait yes I do),

See?

If a story doesn't give me what I need to know, yet there are possible answers, it's dancing around the issue.  Now, if that dancing (allusions, foreshadowing, providing supposition) beats me over the head, then yes that would be a clear form of storytelling.  But it's not. 

SEE?

Those two quotes are entirely personal preference and opinion. You want to be told exactly what made Liara the way she is.

There are answers for Liara's behaviour, and we're given some suggestions as to what those reasons might be. But there's an interesting thing... Liara has undergone something called... wait for it... CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT! Yes, that's right. She's not the same young and incomptent girl in ME1, she's hardened.

I could paint you a picture of Liara: She cares for Shepard, but will not let Shepard that close... after all, she's spent two years being an information broker and trusting no-one. She's not even going to tell Shepard her innermost feelings during their short interaction.

Of course, that's my interpretation of her character based on the information we've been given. I don't need to be explicitly told what makes her tick, as it's possible to infer and draw our own conclusions based on what she is comfortable telling us.

You'll probably argue the point again, and I accept that you want to be explicitly and exactly why Liara acts the way she does. However, you should also accept that there are other players that don't want that. Which is exactly why it's a point of personal preference and opinion rather than a point of critical analysis.

Like I said: agree to disagree.
Peace out.

Modifié par AmstradHero, 26 septembre 2010 - 03:01 .

[smudboy]

[quote]AmstradHero wrote...
Simple question: How does the player determine HOW FAR they should charge when they're using charge over a piece of cover and hence can't see the ground behind it?
And maybe it was just me, but I could have sworn that Tela ended up at set locations rather than charging to any arbitrary point on the ground...
(This is what I mean when I mention technical and design considerations. Think about how the game can be programmed and potential issues the player might face while playing it. It's not as simple as "the effect is already in the game, so players should get it".)
[/quote]
You can tell squadmates to go to a certain location.  Not seeing the problem.

[quote]
Exactly how much blood do you need to see in order to accept that someone is going to die? What, did you want someone to say "she's lost too much blood, we can't save her"? You know, I seem to recall comments about how much blood she'd lost anyway. As Tela is having her final conversation with you, she is a mess. I didn't think for a second that she was ever going to live.
[/quote]
She should've died before her fight then.  But she pulled a Van Damme.  Van Damme gets not only 2nd winds, but 3rd and 4th winds.  At that point, it's cutscene magic power.  In no way does profuse bleeding, especially in cutscenes = definite death.

Do not underestimate the miraculuous powers of the plot.  I hear they can bring people back from the dead, survive gunshots to the head, etc.  Just slap on some omni-gel, medi-gel, mass-effect fields, wait an inordinate amount of time, and voila!

[quote]
You're confusing clear with "being explicitly told"...
[/quote]
Irrelevant.  Explicitly told is a form of clarity.

[quote]
See?
[/quote]
So?  I like details.  More story, please.

[quote]
SEE?

Those two quotes are entirely personal preference and opinion. You want to be told exactly what made Liara the way she is.
[/quote]
Actually I want to be shown, but both is good, too.

This is what makes GOOD STORYTELLING.  Forgive me if you don't want that, but this is why I actually make these videos: the storytelling is lacking, and I point out why.

[quote]
There are answers for Liara's behaviour,
[/quote]
Which fail.  Quite obviously because they are not clear.

[quote]
and we're given some suggestions as to what those reasons might be. But there's an interesting thing... Liara has undergone something called... wait for it... CHARACTER DEVELOPMENT! Yes, that's right. She's not the same young and incomptent girl in ME1, she's hardened.
[/quote]
How?  Why?  What caused this to occur?  Why did she change?

[quote]
I could paint you a picture of Liara: She cares for Shepard, but will not let Shepard that close... after all, she's spent two years being an information broker and trusting no-one. She's not even going to tell Shepard her innermost feelings during their short interaction.
[/quote]
She seemed more like a generic business woman who met an associate from long ago.

[quote]
Of course, that's my interpretation of her character based on the information we've been given. I don't need to be explicitly told what makes her tick, as it's possible to infer and draw our own conclusions based on what she is comfortable telling us.
[/quote]
I don't really care what her personality makes her comfortable, I want the narrative to tell me in a clear why why she is the way she is, and how.

[quote]
You'll probably argue the point again, and I accept that you want to be explicitly and exactly why Liara acts the way she does. However, you should also accept that there are other players that don't want that. Which is exactly why it's a point of personal preference and opinion rather than a point of critical analysis.
[/quote]
It doesn't matter what phraze you use to coin good storytelling.  I want things to make sense.  Clarity is how this is accomplished.  Something as simple as REVENGE or LOVE or LONGING or whatever can be told properly.

For example, if you killed someone, you can say "I killed him because I wanted to."  You could have not liked the person.  You could have had a massive revenge plot that has lasted 10 years and you finally got the chance.  Or you could have simply liked killing.  That's essentially what Liara says when she tells us "I couldn't let you go."  There's no clear motive behind that action.  We think we know.  We think it's love, adoration, a sense of honor, belonging, worship, etc.

Think about this:
Would you prefer:
"I couldn't let you go, because I love you.  But more than that: you're the most important person in the galaxy.  If we don't have you, I feel none of us are going to survive the Reapers.  You're special.  I can't quite...you are..." Liara turns around, being too emotional to continue.

Or

"I couldn't let you go?"

If you're happy with the second?  Good.  For.  You.  We're done.
[quote]
Like I said: agree to disagree.
Peace out.
[/quote]
Nope.  That comment is for fools who can't achieve proper reasoning.

[smudboy]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Regarding the probes:

While I find the functionally omniscient Shadow Broker as depicted by the information he has access to in the Dossiers and video archive to be so versimilitude-breaking and poorly-thought out, so rediculous in what those "features" imply, that I've chosen to ignore those aspects of LotSB ENTIRELY... and get on with enjoying the otherwise very good content...

Suppose that SB's people send out several hundred cheap probes, and a few make it back? What's so rediculous about that? Based on what EDI says, the drift at the destination on Mass Relay trips is random (the IFF transponder sets the Relay to a more accurate mode for whatever ship is carrying it, it seems). Send several hundred of probes through, some will end up arriving safely. Most of those will be damaged by the debris, or destroyed by the Oculus swarm. That a few made it back through the relay with partial damage... not that surprising, is it?

That definitely sounds good, and I certainly would love more information on those probes the SB sent out.

[Pacifien]

smudboy wrote...
Sure, but then we can say the same of Tali, Ash, and Kaidan.  What made Liara different from them, to go off and try and resurrect Shepard's body/fight the Shadow Broker agents?  What was her real reason?  You don't have to talk to ANYONE on the SR1, but all those people will love you regardless, but Liara's love will make her do insane, ridiculous things like turn into a comic book hero, despite the loyalty of Ash/Kaidan, and the awestruckness of Tali that had amicable dealings with the SB before?

Well, unlike the others, Liara did meld with Shepard regardless of romantic encounters and witness the same prothean vision because of it. That probably gives her a different perspective on matters.