175 réponses à ce sujet

[Yojimbo_Ltd]

Is it concrete? lolollol jk



That is not what I was asking. That was what HE was asking.



We weren't validating why something has to be the way it is. I am only arguing in a story-telling perspective, not a lore perspective. Uniqueness is needed for a heroic epic.



If what made shepard unique in the first game is no longer unique.



It first needs to be addressed.



it then needs to be replaced with something else that makes him Unique. Preferably, to make a good story, something related to the first. That is all I ever argued about. That's just story-telling 101. However the majority of the disparity comes from a misunderstanding of what UNIQUENESS is. Hence the conflict.



Bioware knows what it is because they did it with everyone exept shepard. I'm guessing, due to a pure honest mistake or overlook. Look at all the other examples that Karpyshyn wrote and you'll see exactly what i'm talking about.



Now that I think of it, It was all about that damn wanting to kill shepard and bring him right back bull****. And the collectors........

[TheRevanchist]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Yojimbo_Ltd wrote...

Why was it Maximus was chosen?

Maximus was "command material" compared to Commodus who was an utter failure as a  leader, that is if this relating to Russell Crowe's Gladiator.

Ignoreing the fact Commodus was a freakin nut case and Maximus treated the Emperor like a father more then his son ever did.

[Phaelducan]

Again... 4 billion credits is a relative sum of money to the desires of the one spending it. TIM wanted Shepard... he didn't want anyone else. He's arrogant, rich, and not used to settling for option B. For that matter.. he wouldn't have funded the Lazarus project for anyone but Shepard. It's what he wanted, and like it or not, TIM is the catalyst for the ME2 story. If he doesn't want Shep, then the Collector's space him and that's all folks.

It's Shepard's story (as described by Bioware), and TIM doesn't give two crams about your logic or reasoning for why Shep wasn't important or why someone else could have done the job.

It doesn't matter if a hedge trimmer could have done the job. He wanted a chainsaw, so he bought a chainsaw.

@Yojimbo See, that's why it's a pointless argument. You are already convinced that the narrative is borked, and you have your reasons supporting that opinion. You have no interest in hearing anyone else making rational justifications for why it isn't borked, and referencing "story-telling 101" is trite and silly given that the people you are talking about have made millions telling stories (unless you suspect that the people who enjoyed ME2 and it's story are idiots, which you very well may). Have your opinions, treasure them, enjoy them. Hold them tight so that they keep you warm, whatever. Nothing can be gained by arguing about it. Everyone protagonist is unique, as they are a protagonist. It's not a supporting role, it's a primary one. It doesn't matter what you or anyone else thinks should define a protagonist, it's a clearly defined literary role and Shepard is the protagonist. What is the point of arguing about what you think he should or shouldn't be?

All of these threads eventually go to the same place. Either you liked ME2 or you didn't. If you did, then someone else arguing about how bad it was at X or Y won't matter as you already liked and enjoyed the game... and if you didn't, then someone else arguing how good it was at X or Y won't matter as you already dislike the game. What I will ask, in all seriousness, though, is how often you even see an argument go a bunch of pages and all of sudden the argument is over and someone actually changes their mind? No one's mind will be changed here.

Modifié par Phaelducan, 11 décembre 2010 - 06:51 .

[TheRevanchist]

Yojimbo_Ltd wrote...

Is it concrete? lolollol jk

That is not what I was asking. That was what HE was asking.

We weren't validating why something has to be the way it is. I am only arguing in a story-telling perspective, not a lore perspective. Uniqueness is needed for a heroic epic.

If what made shepard unique in the first game is no longer unique.

It first needs to be addressed.

it then needs to be replaced with something else that makes him Unique. Preferably, to make a good story, something related to the first. That is all I ever argued about. That's just story-telling 101. However the majority of the disparity comes from a misunderstanding of what UNIQUENESS is. Hence the conflict.

Bioware knows what it is because they did it with everyone exept shepard. I'm guessing, due to a pure honest mistake or overlook. Look at all the other examples that Karpyshyn wrote and you'll see exactly what i'm talking about.

Now that I think of it, It was all about that damn wanting to kill shepard and bring him right back bull****. And the collectors........

Yea...while I don't personaly have a problem with the "Shepard death" because I can see what Bioware was trying to do with that...But that simply threw all logical reasons for Shepard to remain in the story out the window and almost impossible to justify.

[Praetor Knight]

kylecouch wrote...

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Yojimbo_Ltd wrote...

Why was it Maximus was chosen?

Maximus was "command material" compared to Commodus who was an utter failure as a  leader, that is if this relating to Russell Crowe's Gladiator.

Ignoreing the fact Commodus was a freakin nut case and Maximus treated the Emperor like a father more then his son ever did.

Yeah,

Commodus is a good example of an individual who wants power, but can't handle the pressure.

For some reason that brings TIM to mind, in a way. :innocent:

[TheRevanchist]

Phaelducan wrote...

Again... 4 billion credits is a relative sum of money to the desires of the one spending it. TIM wanted Shepard... he didn't want anyone else. He's arrogant, rich, and not used to settling for option B. For that matter.. he wouldn't have funded the Lazarus project for anyone but Shepard. It's what he wanted, and like it or not, TIM is the catalyst for the ME2 story. If he doesn't want Shep, then the Collector's space him and that's all folks.

It's Shepard's story (as described by Bioware), and TIM doesn't give two crams about your logic or reasoning for why Shep wasn't important or why someone else could have done the job.

It doesn't matter if a hedge trimmer could have done the job. He wanted a chainsaw, so he bought a chainsaw.

I understand that...what I have a peev about is Bioware basicly failed to come up with logical and realistic reason to bring this dude back that could be explained lore-wise. Which is the kind of stuff I care about, I always consider lore more important in games...always...

[Yojimbo_Ltd]

Phaelducan wrote...

Again... 4 billion credits is a relative sum of money to the desires of the one spending it. TIM wanted Shepard... he didn't want anyone else. He's arrogant, rich, and not used to settling for option B. For that matter.. he wouldn't have funded the Lazarus project for anyone but Shepard. It's what he wanted, and like it or not, TIM is the catalyst for the ME2 story. If he doesn't want Shep, then the Collector's space him and that's all folks.

It's Shepard's story (as described by Bioware), and TIM doesn't give two crams about your logic or reasoning for why Shep wasn't important or why someone else could have done the job.

It doesn't matter if a hedge trimmer could have done the job. He wanted a chainsaw, so he bought a chainsaw.

I'm not arguing at TIM. I'm arguing at Karpyshyn. Are you ok man? is it late for you over where ever you are?

These people don't have a life of their own you know. They do what karpyshyn wants them to do. Karpyshyn is writing a story. A story has guidlines to make it better and more relatable to real life. 

its funny how you refer to TIM as an thinking, reasoning entity....

[Iakus]

Phaelducan wrote...

Again... 4 billion credits is a relative sum of money to the desires of the one spending it. TIM wanted Shepard... he didn't want anyone else. He's arrogant, rich, and not used to settling for option B. For that matter.. he wouldn't have funded the Lazarus project for anyone but Shepard. It's what he wanted, and like it or not, TIM is the catalyst for the ME2 story. If he doesn't want Shep, then the Collector's space him and that's all folks.

It's Shepard's story (as described by Bioware), and TIM doesn't give two crams about your logic or reasoning for why Shep wasn't important or why someone else could have done the job.

It doesn't matter if a hedge trimmer could have done the job. He wanted a chainsaw, so he bought a chainsaw.

If four billion credits could have multiple warships secretly built, that's a relatively large sum of money

But that still leaves the story question:  Why is Shepard humanity's only hope?  If the ongoing story somehow needed SHep and TIM to join forces, there are easier ways to go about it.  Ways that don't involve Magical Ressurection Machines.  The mere fact that the Council and Alliance are ignoring the Reaper threat by itself guarantees that Shepard would need to seek outside aid in stopping them.  An Unholy Alliance with a  super-secret (but puts its logo on everything) human-centric quasi-terrorist organisation does not require Shepard to be dead for two years first

[Yojimbo_Ltd]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Yojimbo_Ltd wrote...

Why was it Maximus was chosen?

Maximus was "command material" compared to Commodus who was an utter failure as a  leader, that is if this relating to Russell Crowe's Gladiator.

Ignoreing the fact Commodus was a freakin nut case and Maximus treated the Emperor like a father more then his son ever did.

Yeah,

Commodus is a good example of an individual who wants power, but can't handle the pressure.

For some reason that brings TIM to mind, in a way. :innocent:

Guys......


Those are rhetorical questions. I'm not actually asking you to answer them. I'm stating them to make a point....

[TheRevanchist]

Praetor Shepard wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Yojimbo_Ltd wrote...

Why was it Maximus was chosen?

Maximus was "command material" compared to Commodus who was an utter failure as a  leader, that is if this relating to Russell Crowe's Gladiator.

Ignoreing the fact Commodus was a freakin nut case and Maximus treated the Emperor like a father more then his son ever did.

Yeah,

Commodus is a good example of an individual who wants power, but can't handle the pressure.

For some reason that brings TIM to mind, in a way. :innocent:

TIM fools himself into thinking he's ready for that kind of power...when in reality he would end up just like Commodus...bleeding out on the ground from his failed attempts at stoping the resistence to his command.

[TheRevanchist]

Yojimbo_Ltd wrote...

Praetor Shepard wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

Praetor Shepard wrote...

Yojimbo_Ltd wrote...

Why was it Maximus was chosen?

Maximus was "command material" compared to Commodus who was an utter failure as a  leader, that is if this relating to Russell Crowe's Gladiator.

Ignoreing the fact Commodus was a freakin nut case and Maximus treated the Emperor like a father more then his son ever did.

Yeah,

Commodus is a good example of an individual who wants power, but can't handle the pressure.

For some reason that brings TIM to mind, in a way. :innocent:

Guys......


Those are rhetorical questions. I'm not actually asking you to answer them. I'm stating them to make a point....

I know...I just went abit off topic cuz I love that movie

[Phaelducan]

kylecouch wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Again... 4 billion credits is a relative sum of money to the desires of the one spending it. TIM wanted Shepard... he didn't want anyone else. He's arrogant, rich, and not used to settling for option B. For that matter.. he wouldn't have funded the Lazarus project for anyone but Shepard. It's what he wanted, and like it or not, TIM is the catalyst for the ME2 story. If he doesn't want Shep, then the Collector's space him and that's all folks.

It's Shepard's story (as described by Bioware), and TIM doesn't give two crams about your logic or reasoning for why Shep wasn't important or why someone else could have done the job.

It doesn't matter if a hedge trimmer could have done the job. He wanted a chainsaw, so he bought a chainsaw.

I understand that...what I have a peev about is Bioware basicly failed to come up with logical and realistic reason to bring this dude back that could be explained lore-wise. Which is the kind of stuff I care about, I always consider lore more important in games...always...

Clearly you don't understand it then. The logical and realistic reason is that one of Bioware's characters (crazy or misguided or not) had the means and desire to do something, and hence did it. It doesn't have to make sense to an omniscient outside entity who knows the results of the character's actions, it only has to make sense to the character initiating the process. Think about The Big Lebowski. The Dude doesn't know if Bunny kidnapped herself, he only thinks she did. We (the audience) know the truth, but the character doesn't. Part and parcel of dramatic structure includes characters doing stupid, dangerous, or ignorant things that the audience won't approve of. Would you have brought Shep back? Who cares, TIM wanted to, so he did. That is all the logic you need, as it's character driven. It's character based. For several reasons (again, misguided or not), TIM thought he needed Shepard. Those reasons could have been that Shep likes bleu cheese and TIM assumed that only a soldier who likes bleu cheese could defeat the Reapers. It's irrelevant whether the reasons he wanted Shep are valid according to the reader/player, it only matters if they are valid according to the NPC.

[Yojimbo_Ltd]

Phaelducan wrote...

Again... 4 billion credits is a relative sum of money to the desires of the one spending it. TIM wanted Shepard... he didn't want anyone else. He's arrogant, rich, and not used to settling for option B. For that matter.. he wouldn't have funded the Lazarus project for anyone but Shepard. It's what he wanted, and like it or not, TIM is the catalyst for the ME2 story. If he doesn't want Shep, then the Collector's space him and that's all folks.

It's Shepard's story (as described by Bioware), and TIM doesn't give two crams about your logic or reasoning for why Shep wasn't important or why someone else could have done the job.

It doesn't matter if a hedge trimmer could have done the job. He wanted a chainsaw, so he bought a chainsaw.

@Yojimbo See, that's why it's a pointless argument. You are already convinced that the narrative is borked, and you have your reasons supporting that opinion. You have no interest in hearing anyone else making rational justifications for why it isn't borked, and referencing "story-telling 101" is trite and silly given that the people you are talking about have made millions telling stories (unless you suspect that the people who enjoyed ME2 and it's story are idiots, which you very well may). Have your opinions, treasure them, enjoy them. Hold them tight so that they keep you warm, whatever. Nothing can be gained by arguing about it. Everyone protagonist is unique, as they are a protagonist. It's not a supporting role, it's a primary one. It doesn't matter what you or anyone else thinks should define a protagonist, it's a clearly defined literary role and Shepard is the protagonist. What is the point of arguing about what you think he should or shouldn't be?

All of these threads eventually go to the same place. Either you liked ME2 or you didn't. If you did, then someone else arguing about how bad it was at X or Y won't matter as you already liked and enjoyed the game... and if you didn't, then someone else arguing how good it was at X or Y won't matter as you already dislike the game. What I will ask, in all seriousness, though, is how often you even see an argument go a bunch of pages and all of sudden the argument is over and someone actually changes their mind? No one's mind will be changed here.

You seem bitter. If this upsets you, you shouldn't be talking to me. I didn't mean to make you so angry. I was personally having fun the whole time. But if its different for you, you should go to another thread.

Religion and Politics are no different really. But some random passer-by might be changed by it, like I was. its never pointless.

Godbless, seriously. words can't convey emotion, but i mean it. 

[Yojimbo_Ltd]

Phaelducan wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Again... 4 billion credits is a relative sum of money to the desires of the one spending it. TIM wanted Shepard... he didn't want anyone else. He's arrogant, rich, and not used to settling for option B. For that matter.. he wouldn't have funded the Lazarus project for anyone but Shepard. It's what he wanted, and like it or not, TIM is the catalyst for the ME2 story. If he doesn't want Shep, then the Collector's space him and that's all folks.

It's Shepard's story (as described by Bioware), and TIM doesn't give two crams about your logic or reasoning for why Shep wasn't important or why someone else could have done the job.

It doesn't matter if a hedge trimmer could have done the job. He wanted a chainsaw, so he bought a chainsaw.

I understand that...what I have a peev about is Bioware basicly failed to come up with logical and realistic reason to bring this dude back that could be explained lore-wise. Which is the kind of stuff I care about, I always consider lore more important in games...always...

Clearly you don't understand it then. The logical and realistic reason is that one of Bioware's characters (crazy or misguided or not) had the means and desire to do something, and hence did it. It doesn't have to make sense to an omniscient outside entity who knows the results of the character's actions, it only has to make sense to the character initiating the process. Think about The Big Lebowski. The Dude doesn't know if Bunny kidnapped herself, he only thinks she did. We (the audience) know the truth, but the character doesn't. Part and parcel of dramatic structure includes characters doing stupid, dangerous, or ignorant things that the audience won't approve of. Would you have brought Shep back? Who cares, TIM wanted to, so he did. That is all the logic you need, as it's character driven. It's character based. For several reasons (again, misguided or not), TIM thought he needed Shepard. Those reasons could have been that Shep likes bleu cheese and TIM assumed that only a soldier who likes bleu cheese could defeat the Reapers. It's irrelevant whether the reasons he wanted Shep are valid according to the reader/player, it only matters if they are valid according to the NPC.

But the writers arn't writing it for the characters IN the story. They are writing it for us.

Do you seriously think the other way round?

[Praetor Knight]

Yojimbo_Ltd wrote...

Guys......


Those are rhetorical questions. I'm not actually asking you to answer them. I'm stating them to make a point....

Well darn those Sophists and their rhetorical banter!

Not a fan of metaphorisizing on forums either! Unless for comical effect and maybe with Colbert's literary approval

[Phaelducan]

iakus wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Again... 4 billion credits is a relative sum of money to the desires of the one spending it. TIM wanted Shepard... he didn't want anyone else. He's arrogant, rich, and not used to settling for option B. For that matter.. he wouldn't have funded the Lazarus project for anyone but Shepard. It's what he wanted, and like it or not, TIM is the catalyst for the ME2 story. If he doesn't want Shep, then the Collector's space him and that's all folks.

It's Shepard's story (as described by Bioware), and TIM doesn't give two crams about your logic or reasoning for why Shep wasn't important or why someone else could have done the job.

It doesn't matter if a hedge trimmer could have done the job. He wanted a chainsaw, so he bought a chainsaw.

If four billion credits could have multiple warships secretly built, that's a relatively large sum of money

But that still leaves the story question:  Why is Shepard humanity's only hope?  If the ongoing story somehow needed SHep and TIM to join forces, there are easier ways to go about it.  Ways that don't involve Magical Ressurection Machines.  The mere fact that the Council and Alliance are ignoring the Reaper threat by itself guarantees that Shepard would need to seek outside aid in stopping them.  An Unholy Alliance with a  super-secret (but puts its logo on everything) human-centric quasi-terrorist organisation does not require Shepard to be dead for two years first

Right.... relatively. 4 billion credits to someone who is worth 200 billion is exactly the same, relatively, to someone who has 50 bucks buying a lotto tickey. It doesn't matter if you think warships would have been a better investment. TIM thought the Shep was the best investment to stop the Collector's from taking human colonies. You can think that's wrong all you want, but your opinion doesn't matter. Maybe I think Eve shouldn't have eaten the apple in Genesis. Guess what... she did, and my opinion means squat.

The death serves no purpose other than drama. It's dramatic for a hero to die. The End. It's more dramatic for a hero to come back when you thought they were dead. The End, part II. Cheesy? Cliche? If you think so, then sure, consider his death whatever you want, but in the end (/beats dead horse), it isn't your story to tell.

[Yojimbo_Ltd]

Phaelducan wrote...

iakus wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Again... 4 billion credits is a relative sum of money to the desires of the one spending it. TIM wanted Shepard... he didn't want anyone else. He's arrogant, rich, and not used to settling for option B. For that matter.. he wouldn't have funded the Lazarus project for anyone but Shepard. It's what he wanted, and like it or not, TIM is the catalyst for the ME2 story. If he doesn't want Shep, then the Collector's space him and that's all folks.

It's Shepard's story (as described by Bioware), and TIM doesn't give two crams about your logic or reasoning for why Shep wasn't important or why someone else could have done the job.

It doesn't matter if a hedge trimmer could have done the job. He wanted a chainsaw, so he bought a chainsaw.

If four billion credits could have multiple warships secretly built, that's a relatively large sum of money

But that still leaves the story question:  Why is Shepard humanity's only hope?  If the ongoing story somehow needed SHep and TIM to join forces, there are easier ways to go about it.  Ways that don't involve Magical Ressurection Machines.  The mere fact that the Council and Alliance are ignoring the Reaper threat by itself guarantees that Shepard would need to seek outside aid in stopping them.  An Unholy Alliance with a  super-secret (but puts its logo on everything) human-centric quasi-terrorist organisation does not require Shepard to be dead for two years first

Right.... relatively. 4 billion credits to someone who is worth 200 billion is exactly the same, relatively, to someone who has 50 bucks buying a lotto tickey. It doesn't matter if you think warships would have been a better investment. TIM thought the Shep was the best investment to stop the Collector's from taking human colonies. You can think that's wrong all you want, but your opinion doesn't matter. Maybe I think Eve shouldn't have eaten the apple in Genesis. Guess what... she did, and my opinion means squat.

The death serves no purpose other than drama. It's dramatic for a hero to die. The End. It's more dramatic for a hero to come back when you thought they were dead. The End, part II. Cheesy? Cliche? If you think so, then sure, consider his death whatever you want, but in the end (/beats dead horse), it isn't your story to tell.

So you're saying not to voice an opinion because it doesn't matter? Well, ****! Can't argue with that.

So wait, Why are you arguing again?

[TheRevanchist]

Phaelducan wrote...

iakus wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Again... 4 billion credits is a relative sum of money to the desires of the one spending it. TIM wanted Shepard... he didn't want anyone else. He's arrogant, rich, and not used to settling for option B. For that matter.. he wouldn't have funded the Lazarus project for anyone but Shepard. It's what he wanted, and like it or not, TIM is the catalyst for the ME2 story. If he doesn't want Shep, then the Collector's space him and that's all folks.

It's Shepard's story (as described by Bioware), and TIM doesn't give two crams about your logic or reasoning for why Shep wasn't important or why someone else could have done the job.

It doesn't matter if a hedge trimmer could have done the job. He wanted a chainsaw, so he bought a chainsaw.

If four billion credits could have multiple warships secretly built, that's a relatively large sum of money

But that still leaves the story question:  Why is Shepard humanity's only hope?  If the ongoing story somehow needed SHep and TIM to join forces, there are easier ways to go about it.  Ways that don't involve Magical Ressurection Machines.  The mere fact that the Council and Alliance are ignoring the Reaper threat by itself guarantees that Shepard would need to seek outside aid in stopping them.  An Unholy Alliance with a  super-secret (but puts its logo on everything) human-centric quasi-terrorist organisation does not require Shepard to be dead for two years first

Right.... relatively. 4 billion credits to someone who is worth 200 billion is exactly the same, relatively, to someone who has 50 bucks buying a lotto tickey. It doesn't matter if you think warships would have been a better investment. TIM thought the Shep was the best investment to stop the Collector's from taking human colonies. You can think that's wrong all you want, but your opinion doesn't matter. Maybe I think Eve shouldn't have eaten the apple in Genesis. Guess what... she did, and my opinion means squat.

The death serves no purpose other than drama. It's dramatic for a hero to die. The End. It's more dramatic for a hero to come back when you thought they were dead. The End, part II. Cheesy? Cliche? If you think so, then sure, consider his death whatever you want, but in the end (/beats dead horse), it isn't your story to tell.

It's not ours to tell but it's told for our benifit NOT TIM's not Biowares...us...in the end no matter what reasons you come up with it don't change the fact the story is writtin for us so theres no point arguing about it. The lack of reasoning serves no purpose other then to tick the intended audience off for the sake of convienience.

Modifié par kylecouch, 11 décembre 2010 - 07:14 .

[Praetor Knight]

Phaelducan wrote...

The death serves no purpose other than drama. It's dramatic for a hero to die. The End. It's more dramatic for a hero to come back when you thought they were dead. The End, part II. Cheesy? Cliche? If you think so, then sure, consider his death whatever you want, but in the end (/beats dead horse), it isn't your story to tell.

Well death is assumed, the question is, was it clinical death or a coma?

And how does the Alliance gene mods factor into it?

Other threads have delved into this question before, I need to search to find links.

[Phaelducan]

Yojimbo_Ltd wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Again... 4 billion credits is a relative sum of money to the desires of the one spending it. TIM wanted Shepard... he didn't want anyone else. He's arrogant, rich, and not used to settling for option B. For that matter.. he wouldn't have funded the Lazarus project for anyone but Shepard. It's what he wanted, and like it or not, TIM is the catalyst for the ME2 story. If he doesn't want Shep, then the Collector's space him and that's all folks.

It's Shepard's story (as described by Bioware), and TIM doesn't give two crams about your logic or reasoning for why Shep wasn't important or why someone else could have done the job.

It doesn't matter if a hedge trimmer could have done the job. He wanted a chainsaw, so he bought a chainsaw.

I understand that...what I have a peev about is Bioware basicly failed to come up with logical and realistic reason to bring this dude back that could be explained lore-wise. Which is the kind of stuff I care about, I always consider lore more important in games...always...

Clearly you don't understand it then. The logical and realistic reason is that one of Bioware's characters (crazy or misguided or not) had the means and desire to do something, and hence did it. It doesn't have to make sense to an omniscient outside entity who knows the results of the character's actions, it only has to make sense to the character initiating the process. Think about The Big Lebowski. The Dude doesn't know if Bunny kidnapped herself, he only thinks she did. We (the audience) know the truth, but the character doesn't. Part and parcel of dramatic structure includes characters doing stupid, dangerous, or ignorant things that the audience won't approve of. Would you have brought Shep back? Who cares, TIM wanted to, so he did. That is all the logic you need, as it's character driven. It's character based. For several reasons (again, misguided or not), TIM thought he needed Shepard. Those reasons could have been that Shep likes bleu cheese and TIM assumed that only a soldier who likes bleu cheese could defeat the Reapers. It's irrelevant whether the reasons he wanted Shep are valid according to the reader/player, it only matters if they are valid according to the NPC.

But the writers arn't writing it for the characters IN the story. They are writing it for us.

Do you seriously think the other way round?

Only bad writers try to please everyone, but that's not the point. The writers of any Video Game are trying to convince a consumer to part with 50 bucks or so and be entertained for awhile. The problem with your point of view (only as I see it, as everyone has a right to their point of view), is that you are applying your own set of mores to logic to characters who may or may not be logical or attached to your social conventions. Heck, stories would be boring if all the characters acted rationally, calmly, and exactly how you predict they would. I haven' t heard anyone claim that TIM is the paragon of wisdom, morality, and virtue. He's pretty flawed, as is his organization. That is sort of the point. He does this incredibly wild and out there thing... he resurrects a guy, and then hires him to go investigate missing colonies. Of COURSE that isn't rational or logical, but it doesn't matter, since the character isn't rational or logical..In that sense... the writers ARE writing the story for us, in that they want us to be entertained.

Oh, and I'm not mad. Simply consider me the ultimate forum hypocrite. I argue for the cause of the ceasing of argument.

[Praetor Knight]

Phaelducan wrote...

Oh, and I'm not mad. Simply consider me the ultimate forum hypocrite. I argue for the cause of the ceasing of argument.

That may also be called playing Devil's Advocate, if I follow correctly.

[Phaelducan]

@kyle It's not for the benefit of TIM, in fact he is one of the vector's of the delivery of the narrative (realistically the primary one).



@Praetor I watched Star Trek for too many years to look too closely at mass-market science fiction. You could take any sci-fi out there and carve it to death given the time and the inclination. You will never hear me argue that any of these games are truly realistic as related to current understanding of science or physics. Even if you could prove that the science could work someone will bring religion in and that's another pointless argument. If you don't want to accept the in-game codex for explanations, I don't blame you (many are way out there), but that's a easy path to not wanting to play games in the first place.

[Praetor Knight]

Phaelducan wrote...

@Praetor I watched Star Trek for too many years to look too closely at mass-market science fiction. You could take any sci-fi out there and carve it to death given the time and the inclination. You will never hear me argue that any of these games are truly realistic as related to current understanding of science or physics. Even if you could prove that the science could work someone will bring religion in and that's another pointless argument. If you don't want to accept the in-game codex for explanations, I don't blame you (many are way out there), but that's a easy path to not wanting to play games in the first place.

Cool,

[Yojimbo_Ltd]

Phaelducan wrote...

Yojimbo_Ltd wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Again... 4 billion credits is a relative sum of money to the desires of the one spending it. TIM wanted Shepard... he didn't want anyone else. He's arrogant, rich, and not used to settling for option B. For that matter.. he wouldn't have funded the Lazarus project for anyone but Shepard. It's what he wanted, and like it or not, TIM is the catalyst for the ME2 story. If he doesn't want Shep, then the Collector's space him and that's all folks.

It's Shepard's story (as described by Bioware), and TIM doesn't give two crams about your logic or reasoning for why Shep wasn't important or why someone else could have done the job.

It doesn't matter if a hedge trimmer could have done the job. He wanted a chainsaw, so he bought a chainsaw.

I understand that...what I have a peev about is Bioware basicly failed to come up with logical and realistic reason to bring this dude back that could be explained lore-wise. Which is the kind of stuff I care about, I always consider lore more important in games...always...

Clearly you don't understand it then. The logical and realistic reason is that one of Bioware's characters (crazy or misguided or not) had the means and desire to do something, and hence did it. It doesn't have to make sense to an omniscient outside entity who knows the results of the character's actions, it only has to make sense to the character initiating the process. Think about The Big Lebowski. The Dude doesn't know if Bunny kidnapped herself, he only thinks she did. We (the audience) know the truth, but the character doesn't. Part and parcel of dramatic structure includes characters doing stupid, dangerous, or ignorant things that the audience won't approve of. Would you have brought Shep back? Who cares, TIM wanted to, so he did. That is all the logic you need, as it's character driven. It's character based. For several reasons (again, misguided or not), TIM thought he needed Shepard. Those reasons could have been that Shep likes bleu cheese and TIM assumed that only a soldier who likes bleu cheese could defeat the Reapers. It's irrelevant whether the reasons he wanted Shep are valid according to the reader/player, it only matters if they are valid according to the NPC.

But the writers arn't writing it for the characters IN the story. They are writing it for us.

Do you seriously think the other way round?

Only bad writers try to please everyone, but that's not the point. The writers of any Video Game are trying to convince a consumer to part with 50 bucks or so and be entertained for awhile. The problem with your point of view (only as I see it, as everyone has a right to their point of view), is that you are applying your own set of mores to logic to characters who may or may not be logical or attached to your social conventions. Heck, stories would be boring if all the characters acted rationally, calmly, and exactly how you predict they would. I haven' t heard anyone claim that TIM is the paragon of wisdom, morality, and virtue. He's pretty flawed, as is his organization. That is sort of the point. He does this incredibly wild and out there thing... he resurrects a guy, and then hires him to go investigate missing colonies. Of COURSE that isn't rational or logical, but it doesn't matter, since the character isn't rational or logical..In that sense... the writers ARE writing the story for us, in that they want us to be entertained.

Oh, and I'm not mad. Simply consider me the ultimate forum hypocrite. I argue for the cause of the ceasing of argument.

Well, In a way it certainly entertained me!!! I'm sitting here raving about it at 1 in the morning!

I was arguing plot, not irrationality on TIM's part.

If that WAS a part of the story, it should have been addressed. It should have been a THEME. Don't you be so dense you!

[Phaelducan]

It was addressed. What do you want, Cliff's Notes? This is a Video Game, not Shakespeare. The irrationality of TIM is part of the plot. If Bioware thought to make TIM an unsung hero and have his decisions and motivations make us all sing and dance his praises... I'll eat my hat (no really, I will).



He's set up to be a bit of a cloaca, and that's part of the plot.