Ce sujet est fermé
Usualfool wrote...
1 : An argument from history. Mass Effect 1 established a franchise. Mass Effect 2 established a trajectory of "growth." Mass Effect 3 will most likely follow it. As Mass Effect 2 was inferior to Mass Effect 1 in all significant ways--and here I mean that Mass Effect 2 had better graphics than the original, but those are insignificant--Mass Effect 3 will also be inferior. (An abreviated exposition: smaller and fewer environments, restrictive story structure, no meaningful customization options, heat sinks....)
2 : An argument from analogy. The Trailer sucked, and if it is indicitatie then the game will as well. Let me unpack this. In Mass Effect 3 the Reapers are attacking earth. They're not ABOUT to attack; they are attacking. First, we see that they are ineffectual; time has apparently taken away their civilization destruction skills so that they can be effectively hindered by a sniper. Second, we realize that one of two things must happen: either the entire third game must occupy an incredibly compressed time frame, or the Reapers are not a serious threat. If it is the former, then the third game will be even smaller and more restrictive than the second. If it is the latter, then it is anticlimactic and ultimately irrelevant.
Terrible logic. All biased and personal-based. It's like trying to prove a sequence/series/numerical relation in math that continues on for N+1 permutations by using examples, sure it happens for the next N in line and worked for the N before it (hence your "based on history claim") but that doesn't necessarily hold for each after that. A proof by mathematical induction comes into play here, but as far as I'm aware there isn't a such thing for reality lol.
Your logic makes no sense to me, but that's your opinion. Perhaps the title of this thread should be "Why I think Mass Effect 3 is going to suck"
Modifié par SomeKindaEnigma, 24 février 2011 - 02:20 .
Retour en haut
