LGTX wrote...
Icinix wrote...
LGTX wrote...
I don't think scripted deaths will downgrade ME3 to 'just another good story', seems like an excuse to not believe the unpleasant. Mass Effect wasn't about telling your own story through playing God, it was making decisions. You have absolute control over Shepard, but not over everything that surrounds him/her. And ME3 is the final act anyway. It's not like someone dies and then there's a whole lot of story left to experience without him/her. Everything that will happen in ME3 will be final. So I welcome some bitter deaths, that may trigger the emotional aspect a bit more.
As long as its handled like the VS or SM where the deaths are results of outcomes of being forced to make tough decisions, I'm fine with it.
Having a situation where Recurring Character Bob must die at this point here means that I know every single time I play ME3, he's going to die and when. After a few playthroughts, its just another part of the story and loses the impact from the first time. If its a situation where recurring character x, y or z must die, and decisions Shep make will be the cause / result - then it means everytime I play, my outcomes change and each time is a new experience and tugs on the heartstrings in new ways.
Why? Why should you always be in control? I mean yeah, understanding that you made a mistake somehwere down the road and because of that a valuable teammate has just died is a powerful achievement in emotional storytelling, but won't THAT get stale as well, after some time? If you're planning on multiple playthroughs, the scenario you suggest and the one where there's a recurring death bear the exact same emotional response, just different amounts of content. You're still metagaming it the second time. No way around it.
Generally because its a game you should always have some kind of control, even limited, as often as possible.
Definitely the outcomes would get stale as well, but its the difference between becoming stale 5 playthroughs later or after the second. You're not telling one story, you're able to tell as many as there are combinations. Sure the premise is the same, but if you've built a style of character through a play through - then the outcome can be as meaningless or meaningfull as you want.
Sure, its metagaming, but I'm not one who thinks metagaming is a dirty word. I think metagaming is something very unique games and awesome. It means the player can tell their story, their way on their terms. Thats what differentiates games from books and movies. Shouldn't that be one of the reasons pushing games into being recognised as Art? Not just a good story - but a story that changes according to the story the player wants to tell.
The more power and choice you give a player, the greater the engagement and power of the story telling.
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
:devil:
