1198 réponses à ce sujet

[Moondoggie]

Oh Smudboy i do enjoy his holier than thou attitude and his obsession with ME2. It's sort of adorable when people geek over a subject to the point their write whole essays on the subject.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Smudboy did often raise a good point or two in his videos. Too bad they were buried under nitpicks and somewhat of an elitist attitude at times.

[Dexi]

A good debater, or a guy which is right, proves it with minimum words.

Nitpicking is a distraction that prevents the flaws of the essence to be seen.


That's why everyone argues with Smudboy, because, in essence, even though some/we realize it or not when we hear his arguments, he's wrong about most of the things. The nitpicking/distractions, the attitude and w/e only make it worse for him.


I promptly disagree with about 80% of his arguments/theories/whatever, but I do strongly agree with the remaining 20%.

Ofc, after all, it's all a matter of opinion.

[xSTONEYx187x]

Thought he counter video was awesome sauce. If you're a member here, hurry up with part to squee913.

[Estelindis]

So I watched the video. I quite enjoyed it (the narrator has a nice voice). The refutations themselves are somewhat mixed - some weak, some strong - but it was still worth watching. Thanks for the link.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

smudboy more like smugboy (heh)


funny he bans people from commenting on his videos when they disagree with him (fragile self ego lol)

[Il Divo]

Doctor_Jackstraw wrote...

smudboy more like smugboy (heh)


funny he bans people from commenting on his videos when they disagree with him (fragile self ego lol)

Bans people who disagree with him? Or bans people who disparage him for having an opinion? From what I remember of Smudboy, he was always up for a good debate. He never was the type to simply dismiss an argument.

Admittedly, he could be a stubborn ass sometimes.

Modifié par Il Divo, 08 mars 2011 - 03:14 .

[wizardryforever]

Il Divo wrote...

He never was the type to simply dismiss an argument.

Oh, he did so quite frequently.  If you poked a hole in his argument (mainly involving calling him out on subjectivity), he would flatly refuse to even consider that you may have a point.  Usually he did this by quoting you and just saying that you were wrong, with no support at all to that statement.  Given his penchant for endless debate, it is difficult to chalk that up to weariness.

Not only that, but he derailed threads to talk about ME2's plot at every opportunity.  He may have had some valid points, but most people are more inclined to listen when you don't act like an elitist, know-it-all ****.

[didymos1120]

To put it succinctly, the problem with Smud was that he kinda argued like a creationist: mantle of false authority, not holding his "holy" text of ME1 to the same standards as ME2 (maybe he's rectified this with his recent ME1 vids, but too little too late, if so), etc. He was quite fond of the Gish Gallop technique too, as I recall.

[AdmiralCheez]

@didymos1120: The fact that you say what you say with that beautiful crocoduck avatar of yours makes me all happy inside. I have found a kindred spirit.

In a completely platonic way.

[JKoopman]

Smudboy's video was about 40% valid points, 50% semi-valid b*tching, and 10% irrational or inaccurate ranting, all delivered in the most monotonous, make-you-want-to-hammer-nails-into-your-head tone of voice imaginable. Something tells me this "counter" video is going to be 90% focused on the 10% of Smudboy's video that was easily refuted and the rest will just be glossed over like it's inconsequential. Props if the person doing it can speak in a way that can hold your attention for more than 30 seconds though.

[didymos1120]

JKoopman wrote...
Something tells me this "counter" video is going to be 90% focused on the 10% of Smudboy's video that was easily refuted and the rest will just be glossed over like it's inconsequential.

No, he's actually taking each point raised in order, and giving a rebuttal.  And he mostly avoids talking about Smudboy in personal terms after the intro segment, and most of that was him explaining that he wasn't going to talk much about Smudboy in personal terms.

[Eternz]

The thing that completely makes me unable to watch smudboys video (and even stops me watching the counter analysis, because it has clips of his video) is that he tries SO SO SO SO hard to copy redlettermedia's ripping of the new star wars prequals that its just pathetic beyond belief. It's just such a bad imitation that he has to make useless points just so he could do the same droney title sequence before each bit. But because mass effect is no where near as bad as the star wars prequals none of his 'witty' jabs at it are even funny, or make sense.

Bottom line is, he tried to become popular by blatantly ripping an original person review methods, and plagarism angers me.

[Gemini1179]

Wow. Over 5 minutes into this thing and the guy has said absolutely nothing so far...

*Edit*

Ungh... this is brutal. Smudboy may come off elitest, and I may not agree with everything he says, and the point is well made by squee913 that in science fiction, you can pretty much do what you please- as that is it's point- HOWEVER, smudboy attempts to argue story, character and plot from traditional literature structural changes. Han Solo did not get encased in Carbonite at the start of Empire, Neo didn't flatline at the start of Matrix Reloaded, Captain Sparrow wasn't swallowed by the Kraken at the start of Pirates 2. All for good reason. Plot, suspense, drama and basic story structure.

THAT SAID- I actually have no problems with the opening of ME2 and found it a quite exhilarating and refreshing take on conventional storytelling, where it failed for me was that after that, there was little story or development on Shepard himself as a person who has been dead for 2 years. What did he experience during that time? Does he have nightmares taking him back to suffocating in the atmosphere, etc. These things are written so well in some of the ME fan fics out there that it disappoints me that there couldn't be something of it in the game, a la Revan's dreams in KOTOR when you approached each new planet. Shepard could be a person who is having nightmares as the story progresses and in turn has to deal with those as he/she is helping his/her crew through theirs.

...nuff for now.

Modifié par Gemini1179, 08 mars 2011 - 05:12 .

[Whatever42]

Gemini1179 wrote...

Wow. Over 5 minutes into this thing and the guy has said absolutely nothing so far...

He spends the first few minutes establishing that its not personal and discussing his own motivation. He really does get into it and is pretty entertaining.

[Gemini1179]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Gemini1179 wrote...

Wow. Over 5 minutes into this thing and the guy has said absolutely nothing so far...

He spends the first few minutes establishing that its not personal and discussing his own motivation. He really does get into it and is pretty entertaining.

I got that, but I found it almost as grating as listening to smudboy to be honest. I've since listened to more and have edited my previous post a bit. I'm finding myself picking apart his arguments, and agree with some.

For example, I agree that you can pretty much do what you will with sci-fi convention, but I also see Smudboy's logic that grounding it in 'plausable' reality with as few 'miracle exemptions' as possible allows the story to resonate better. I'll give you two examples from film:

#1 - 'Batman and Robin' vs 'The Dark Knight'. One is more comicbook-friendly, and the other is more grounded in 'reality', as it were.

#2- 'Highlander' vs 'Highlander 2: The Quickening' - The first has the simple miracle exemption of the immortals, and the second... Zeist? Need I say more?

Squee913 argues the "4 billion credits" issue. It's an argument that makes as much sense as Smudboy's, and here's why:
I've discovered after playing ME1 again is that there is no established context in to what a 'credit' is actually worth to you or me. In ME1, Rear Admiral M. (not even going to try and spell it) mentions  the cost of the Normandy's mass effect core is 120 billion credits. In ME2, they say the cost of bringing Shepard back is 4 billion credits, and that is treated like it is some astronomical amount, in addition to the supposed 120 billion spend on the Normandy SR-2's drive core... see where this is going?

- "Cerberus is a secretive organization, they don't like drawing attention to themselves..." I'd have agreed with this after playing ME1, but it seems the writers didn't really consider this in ME2. For starters, they build space stations to look like their symbol, each employee wears a uniform with the Cerberus symbol on it- often in public- and they plaster the symbol on every bulkhead, piece of equipment and even the outside of their ships!
In fact, Cerberus is probably one of the worst 'secretive' organizaitons I've ever heard of in Sci-fi. The "Tal Shiar", "Obsidian Order", and "Section 31" organizations from Star Trek make Cerberus look like the Y.

...and now back to the video...

[Iakus]

Gemini1179 wrote...

I got that, but I found it almost as grating as listening to smudboy to be honest. I've since listened to more and have edited my previous post a bit. I'm finding myself picking apart his arguments, and agree with some.

For example, I agree that you can pretty much do what you will with sci-fi convention, but I also see Smudboy's logic that grounding it in 'plausable' reality with as few 'miracle exemptions' as possible allows the story to resonate better. I'll give you two examples from film:

#1 - 'Batman and Robin' vs 'The Dark Knight'. One is more comicbook-friendly, and the other is more grounded in 'reality', as it were.

#2- 'Highlander' vs 'Highlander 2: The Quickening' - The first has the simple miracle exemption of the immortals, and the second... Zeist? Need I say more? ...

It's like I've said:

In science fiction, anything is possible, but not everything should be possible.  "It's the future" shouldn't be a catch-all explanation, 

[JKoopman]

I pretty much agree with Gemini1179's take. Well said.

[Whatever42]

Gemini1179 wrote...


<snip>

I've discovered after playing ME1 again is that there is no established context in to what a 'credit' is actually worth to you or me. In ME1, Rear Admiral M. (not even going to try and spell it) mentions  the cost of the Normandy's mass effect core is 120 billion credits. In ME2, they say the cost of bringing Shepard back is 4 billion credits, and that is treated like it is some astronomical amount, in addition to the supposed 120 billion spend on the Normandy SR-2's drive core... see where this is going?

- "Cerberus is a secretive organization, they don't like drawing attention to themselves..." I'd have agreed with this after playing ME1, but it seems the writers didn't really consider this in ME2. For starters, they build space stations to look like their symbol, each employee wears a uniform with the Cerberus symbol on it- often in public- and they plaster the symbol on every bulkhead, piece of equipment and even the outside of their ships!
In fact, Cerberus is probably one of the worst 'secretive' organizaitons I've ever heard of in Sci-fi. The "Tal Shiar", "Obsidian Order", and "Section 31" organizations from Star Trek make Cerberus look like the Y.

...and now back to the video...

Oh, I don't 100% agree with him either. For example, anything is possible in science fiction but a science fiction story has to live within its own rules. However, he still makes some good points. I think the jist of it is that there are plausible explanations to a great many of smudboy's criticisms. For example, his comparison to Hannibal was very good.

You could actually critique real events the same way smud critiqued ME2. Someone actually did that once using WWII (not in reaction to smud, this was a while ago in response to other plot hole fanatics) to show that WWII was badly written and full of plotholes.  This is a video game, not a ten-thousand page novel. People just have to accept that not every plot decision will be fully explored.

Modifié par Whatever666343431431654324, 08 mars 2011 - 05:39 .

[Gemini1179]

iakus wrote...

It's like I've said:

In science fiction, anything is possible, but not everything should be possible.  "It's the future" shouldn't be a catch-all explanation, 

Exactly. I'm trying to update my thoughts as I go through this and they are fresh.

- I agree that Shepard is important for nothing else than being a symbol a la Hannibal, Joan of Ark, etc.

- Personally, I wished that Shepard's encounters with the beacons and the cypher made him/her just a little extra special, but that is in reality just icing on the cake IMO.

- squee913 probably steps on his own foot when he goes in to the whole "they were probably gonna do it anyway, why not Shepard" or "they were probably already developing the techniques". These are both speculative and the only thing we really get from the game is that the Lazarus Project was started when Shep was killed, and Shep was the only subject.

[didymos1120]

Gemini1179 wrote...

In ME2, they say the cost of bringing Shepard back is 4 billion credits, and that is treated like it is some astronomical amount, in addition to the supposed 120 billion spend on the Normandy SR-2's drive core... see where this is going?

No, because you're comparing things that aren't operating on the same scales.  120 billion credits in the ME2 universe is seen (by some, namely Mikhailovich) as ridiculous cost for developing an entirely new form of starship drive.  4 billions credits is seen as a ridiculous amount to spend on, effectively, a single person's medical bill.  His argument makes perfect sense in that context: militaries cost a crapton more than even the largest conceivable hospital bills.  Notice how according to EDI it was actually the SR-2 which ate up the majority of Cerberus' funding?  And how Wilson noted that TIM never seemed worried about Lazarus going over budget? There's a reason for that.  I guarantee you that Normandy bill utterly dwarfed the Lazarus one.

[Whatever42]

Gemini1179 wrote...

- squee913 probably steps on his own foot when he goes in to the whole "they were probably gonna do it anyway, why not Shepard" or "they were probably already developing the techniques". These are both speculative and the only thing we really get from the game is that the Lazarus Project was started when Shep was killed, and Shep was the only subject.

Well... to pick a fight... if you listen to the recordings, right after they retrieved Shepard's body, they seemed to have the technology to rebuild him. We have no idea when or how they got that technology but they did have it before they recovered Shepard.

[Gemini1179]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Gemini1179 wrote...

- squee913 probably steps on his own foot when he goes in to the whole "they were probably gonna do it anyway, why not Shepard" or "they were probably already developing the techniques". These are both speculative and the only thing we really get from the game is that the Lazarus Project was started when Shep was killed, and Shep was the only subject.

Well... to pick a fight... if you listen to the recordings, right after they retrieved Shepard's body, they seemed to have the technology to rebuild him. We have no idea when or how they got that technology but they did have it before they recovered Shepard.

Fair enough. I guess I simply felt it didn't really need to be said after what had come before. It's like using your best arguments first then ending with your worst- a no no in the debate world to be sure.

- I also agree with squee913's arguments for the death at the beginning of the game, and pretty much for the same reasons.

- The arguments of both smudboy and squee913 on what is essentially the 'tutorial level' are pretty much both valid because the whole thing is rediculous to begin with BUT is a necessary evil in the game itself purely for gameplay reasons. There is a fanfic called "Recovery" on fanfiction.net which basically tells the story of a very long and drawn out process it is to actually get Shepard, newly rebuilt, back up to speed. Using eyes that have never been used, muscles, endurance, etc. It's quite good and something I'd consider more grounded in reality within the give-and-take of sci-fi.

However, being a video game in the end, there are some sacrifices that are acceptable in my own personal opinion, and the turorial level is one of them. Any number of arguments can be made for both positions and they could both be equally vaild as far as I'm concerned. The LotSB DLC certainly lends more credence and was probably added specifically to quell a bit of concern about Wilson's motives anyway. Still, when you're working for one 'secret organization' or another, does it really matter in the end? At leas with Cerberus, one would think that it would have been made quite clear where one stood. But I digress...


...and now back to the show.

[Gemini1179]

Ok, all finished.

- The Cerberus railroading is agian, a give and take. You can be confrontational all you want through the game, but the only time you really get to make a choice is at the end. squee913 points out, correctly, that this is one of the things that is sort of unavoidable due to the insane amount of time and energy it would have taken to give you more options. Fair enough I say.

   What I would add, however, perhaps a bit in smudboy's favor, is that you never REALLY take Cerberus to task for anything. There is one brief conversation with Miranda about past Cerberus operations that that was pretty much it. I really wanted to be able to delve more into things like Akuze, Toombs, Admiral Kahoku (which is never brought up with Miranda) etc. Why couldn't you either sway Miranda, or lose her loyalty that way as well? It would have added a completly different dimension to the game.

    To make things worse, when Tela Vasir calls you out on Cerberus' actions, (rightly so, I felt), there is not one option you can choose that I would have endorsed. "I know what they've done, and it doesn't matter"- WHAT? If you're of the mind that you don't like Cerberus, and my character didn't, there was no option for me to choose there. What I REALLY wanted to say there was: "This is a temporary necessary evil, I have not forgotten, nor forgiven what Cerberus has done in the past and I will rectify that situation in time, believe me." How hard was that?

- As for Shepard's character development, there is again, some truth to both sides. I feel that neither has it right, nor do either have it wrong. Yes, your Shepard can change based on your decisions and can be shaped depending on how you have changed in your opinions while playing the game. For example, most of my ME1 playthroughs were Paragon, because I simply, as a person do not like being cruel. I even tried a ME1 Renegade playthrough, but when I got to the Rachni Queen and chose to destroy her and then it gives you one of the classic "Are you sure??" moments, I simply could not bring myself to do it. * As a note, I find it particularly odd that the generic playthrough for ME2 has you having killed the Rachni queen in ME1 when it in fact takes two choices to kill her, and only the one to save her.*

  Continuing my previous thought... upon further playthroughs of ME1 and ME2, I've found myself not picking purely Paragon choices all the time any more. The council is hanging on by a thread for me simply because I want to do the Asari Councilor. For some reason I simply find her to be the most attractive Asari in either game, with Liara and Shiala coming in second and 3rd. But, I snipe the Loki Mech while recruiting Garrus, destroy the Loki mech during Overlord... hmmm... maybe I just don't like Loki mechs? Anyway, I do some Renegade stuff in both games these days when I play and I consider it both a growth for my Shepard and myself.

 To comment on smudboy's opinion on the matter, I do feel, as he does, that there is little else in the game to really make your Shepard complex. I've mentioned before that I felt it would be interesting for Shepard to have nightmares. I constantly feel let down by the fact that when you reunite with Liara on Illium, neither she, nor Miranda, if she's with you even acknowledge each other. You don't get to talk to Liara about her association with Miranda, and vice versa. That would have been nice. Perhaps if you did Miranda's loyalty mission, and after you talk to Liara, that back on the Normandy, Miranda could come up to your cabin to 'clear the air' as it were, much like Liara did in LotSB.

   In the end, that is why LotSB is really one of the best parts of the game, despite the 'logic' problems that are necessary to actually give you some gameplay (ie landing on the opposite end of the Shadow Broker's ship to the door you want to enter) because it gives you it all, action, comedy, romance (if you wish), heartbreak (again, if you wish), story, and most of all- someone asks Shepard how he/she is doing. Literally, when I played LotSB, I was sitting there saying "This is what I want. This." because it had it all in my opinion and while the rest of the game lacks in that here and there, I can't really complain because I enjoyed it enough that I play it over and over.

   In conclusion, reviews like smudboy's and squee913's are neither right nor wrong not only purely based on opinion, but often due to game structure requirements, story flow, level design, etc.


ME1 had a grander scope, a more awe-inspiring feel, and felt a bit more like you were there.

- There was a certain mundaneness to it that I really found refreshing (yes, I liked the elevator rides- mostly cause I was checking out Tali's butt- yeah, I'm a perv, big whoop, wanna fight about it? ) and the story telling was great.

- The Mako drove me nuts not because of how cut-and-paste all the N7 missions were, but because the control system for the Mako was simply poorly designed when they designed the physics so well. All they had to do was add X,Y,Z axis point thrusters on the front and back corners which would automatically compensate for the physics in game to keep the Mako oriented to the direction you were pointing the control stick. There was nothing more frustrating than when you were driving forward, hit a bump and had the Mako turn sideways, or more infuriatingly, backwards.

- The N7 Missions were all cut-and-paste.

- I did thoroughly enjoy the ability to haul out my gun anywhere I was and randomly shoot things to blow off steam.

- Flow of the story worked reall well.

- Having to train in your weapons was not cool. But the amount of abilities and their variety was.

- Finding things, door switches, crates, etc was easier because the highlight brackets were more pronounced. In ME2, I found that I was often playing 'marco polo' with the indicator at the top of the screen telling me that somewhere in the direction I was looking was a data pad I could hack.


ME2 removed some of the grandeur for me, but upped the character quality.

- My thoughts on the thermal clips is that- ungh, I'm not getting into it. Simply put, they could have kept the ME1 system, but used thermal clips to increase the amount of rounds that a particular gun could fire before over heating. ie if your pistol will be able to shoot 12 times before over heating and leaving you haveing to wait for it to cool down, you could simply pop in a thermal clip which would absorb some of the heat allowing you to now fire 18 or 24 times before your gun over heats. This could have added so much to the game in terms of research projects, tactical ammo use, etc. Crap, I'm rambling on about thermal clips again...

- ME2 improved on the armor situation for Shepard (Never liked the armor restrictions of ME1)

- Not having to train in weapon use is a plus (still makes sense that certain classes would favor certain weapons due to differing fighting styles)

- The weapons are more unique, but alas, still fall into the once-you-get-the-best-one-you-don't-use-the-others-ever-again category. (Locust, Widow and Mattock, I'm looking at you...) At least in ME1, I still found it useful to use a weapon with perhaps a lower overall damage output, but greater ammo capacity and accuracy due to the awesome weapon mods you could put in your guns...

- N7 Missions are more unique, but lose a bit of the freedom you had in ME1.

- The interrupt system is awesome.

- The no-helmet toggle system is terrible. Duh, right? My first time playing ME2, I had the Blood Dragon armor on (cause I had just gotten to an armor locker at TIM's base and was trying out my first bit of DLC) and went to Freedom's Progress and Tali does the "...wait, Shepard?" - Took me right out of the moment. I was sitting there having thoroughly enjoyed myself up to that point and I was sitting there, blank faced, saying "What? How does she know it's me?" A kick ass Revan-esque helmet removal cut-scene moment would have been so epic as well. But I digress...

- Planet scanning is actually soothing for me and it is something I honestly don't mind doing. It is far less stressful, however once you've beaten the game and get the starting bonuses.

- Totally thought the various shops in the game were a wasted opportunity for Shepard to buy new casual clothes because after looking through my 4 basic outfits the first time I played, I was totally believing that I would be able to purchase more as the game went on.

- Graphics and lighting in ME2 are so much better. No more detailed faces with blurry heads (I'm looking at you Ventraliss)

- Ammo powers and no customizable weapon mods? This is really a couple of the worst things about ME2. The logic of the restrictions on ammo powers really makes no sense except for Jack's Warp ammo, because she actually uses her own power for it.

- On my first ME2 playthrough, when Aria told Shepard Omega's one rule, my jaw dropped, I did a double take and then I got a wicked grin as I realized that the 'grit' of the game had in fact been upped. This also made Jack a breath of fresh air.

- When my FemShep couldn't get back together with Liara (during my first playthroug) I totall hit on the next available Asari, Samara, and was actually pleasantly surprised when she turned me down. Totally left me bummed though as Tali, Jack and Miranda were having none of my advances.

- Hermia's head turns an impossible amount as she flips you off while walking away to see her lawyer. Anyone else notice this?


Somehow my final comments on squee913's video turned into a "What I liked and disliked about ME1 and ME2".

Ok, NOW I'm done.