Aller au contenu

Photo

"I'll always want you in my life." Miranda Lawson in Mass Effect 3


82210 réponses à ce sujet

#44526
CrutchCricket

CrutchCricket
  • Members
  • 7 750 messages

flemm wrote...
Well, yeah. Which is why I say that motivations are more difficult to speculate about. But let's not slide into a false dichotomy where the only two possibilities are (1) clandestine meetings of all Bioware developers in a sound-proof room to figure out how best to gut Miranda as a character and (2) lack of any real creative direction due to indifference/game development reasons, etc.

The reality is neither of those two, of course.

There *is* a direction. Simply a deeply misguided one that is then... kept at arm's length for the most part, but which is still readily apparent (and which prevents there from being a more positive direction for actual character growth).

I wouldn't resort to those two, no. I'm saying there was very little focus/significance given to Miranda as is the case for most ME2 characters. But they had to do something. So following the tried and true principle of "keep it simple" they arrived at loyalty mission 2.0. It has everything you need and nothing you don't (from their perspective). Miranda is present? Check. Easy positive aspect: family? Check. Closure? Dad dies, she dies (drama bonus!)? Check. Fits within overall story- Sanctuary, Lawson connection? Check. We're done. Time for lunch.

Then some of our complaints may have gotten through hence the shoddy patching- emails, survival scenario etc.

#44527
flemm

flemm
  • Members
  • 5 786 messages

CrutchCricket wrote...
I wouldn't resort to those two, no. I'm saying there was very little focus/significance given to Miranda as is the case for most ME2 characters. But they had to do something. So following the tried and true principle of "keep it simple" they arrived at loyalty mission 2.0. It has everything you need and nothing you don't (from their perspective). Miranda is present? Check. Easy positive aspect: family? Check. Closure? Dad dies, she dies (drama bonus!)? Check. Fits within overall story- Sanctuary, Lawson connection? Check. We're done. Time for lunch.



Sadly, no, I don't think that's plausible at all. If you took the basic outline of Miranda's appearance, it could be handled in a variety of different ways, some much more satisfying than what's in the game.

Certainly game development reasons may have adversely affected Miranda's role, but that is *in addition* to a reworking of the character that must date from pre-LotSB, that is to say from a year and a half ago approximately (well before resource limitations, etc. could be said to be responsable).

As to late additions, yes, some complaints obviously registered. But that changes nothing as to the main direction. If anything, it makes it more readily apparent by contrast.

Edit: At best, it's possible that somebody understands the basic problem with what's there, but it was too late in the game's development to really fix it. The worst part of the role in that regard is actually the main substance of the role, i.e. the scene on Sanctuary. This is plausibly older than the rest, conceptually, and harder to adjust. So, that supports somewhat the idea that there was an attempt to move away from the early direction when the writers got around to fleshing out the role late in development. 

Modifié par flemm, 31 mars 2012 - 08:19 .


#44528
Totally Not Swaggacide

Totally Not Swaggacide
  • Members
  • 2 554 messages

ThomGau wrote...

Totally Not Swaggacide wrote...

@Ieldra2
Mac Walters couldn't risk Miranda being more interesting than Liara.


Indeed, that would be a reason among other things :P

It seems there was a conflict or an incomprehension about the reasons why we love Miranda in the first place from the writers.
They also seem be very conservative and narrow minded when it comes to morality : White or Black, Grey isn't tolerated (just look at what they've done to Cerberus in ME3) which was't good news for Miranda from the beginning.


Yeah I know what you mean. I really hate how Cerberus went from this shadowy organization and the TIM being a mysterious villain to a mustache twirling villian 

#44529
Ieldra

Ieldra
  • Members
  • 25 190 messages

CrutchCricket wrote...

flemm wrote...
Well, yeah. Which is why I say that motivations are more difficult to speculate about. But let's not slide into a false dichotomy where the only two possibilities are (1) clandestine meetings of all Bioware developers in a sound-proof room to figure out how best to gut Miranda as a character and (2) lack of any real creative direction due to indifference/game development reasons, etc.

The reality is neither of those two, of course.

There *is* a direction. Simply a deeply misguided one that is then... kept at arm's length for the most part, but which is still readily apparent (and which prevents there from being a more positive direction for actual character growth).

I wouldn't resort to those two, no. I'm saying there was very little focus/significance given to Miranda as is the case for most ME2 characters. But they had to do something. So following the tried and true principle of "keep it simple" they arrived at loyalty mission 2.0. It has everything you need and nothing you don't (from their perspective). Miranda is present? Check. Easy positive aspect: family? Check. Closure? Dad dies, she dies (drama bonus!)? Check. Fits within overall story- Sanctuary, Lawson connection? Check. We're done. Time for lunch.

Then some of our complaints may have gotten through hence the shoddy patching- emails, survival scenario etc.

You know what makes me think you may be right? The horrible mess of ME3's ending. If they could fubar that without coonsciously trying I can believe they'd character-assassinate Miranda without trying. It's as if some noob of a writer sat on her part for half an hour. Miranda/Cerberus? That would have been difficult to deal with, and we don't have more than 10 lines for that scene anyway..... etc. etc..

It's not as if other parts of the game hadn't suffered from the same. You see the resul of cuts, cut corners etc. everywhere that isn't Sur'kesh/Tuchanka or Rannoch.

On the other hand, we see the direction it was going in LotSB. So....I agree with flemm, lack of resources and incompetence is not the whole picture.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 31 mars 2012 - 08:17 .


#44530
Visii

Visii
  • Members
  • 971 messages
Hey everyone.

We're putting together a list of letters regarding the treatment of the ME2 LI's in ME3. We know a few people going to PAX, so if you have anything to say, PM me and we'll send it along!

#44531
flemm

flemm
  • Members
  • 5 786 messages

Visii wrote...

Hey everyone.

We're putting together a list of letters regarding the treatment of the ME2 LI's in ME3. We know a few people going to PAX, so if you have anything to say, PM me and we'll send it along!



Thanks for the suggestion, I will certainly PM you with some thoughts!

#44532
CrutchCricket

CrutchCricket
  • Members
  • 7 750 messages

flemm wrote...
Certainly game development reasons may have adversely affected Miranda's role, but that is *in addition* to a reworking of the character that must date from pre-LotSB, that is to say from a year and a half ago approximately (well before resource limitations, etc. could be said to be responsable).

This is plausibly older than the rest, conceptually, and harder to adjust. So, that supports somewhat the idea that there was an attempt to move away from the early direction when the writers got around to fleshing out the role late in development. 

Where is the underlined coming from? I think that's the assumption that's throwing you off. What evidence do you have for it?

No it doesn't. The fact that Sanctuary was planned months and months ago does not necessarily prove deliberate derailing and it is still tied to resources as developers would obviously plan what to spend time on and what to fluff. I'm not saying they ran out of time and threw some **** together. I'm saying they planned not to spend too much time on Miranda in the first place and thus threw some **** together.

Modifié par CrutchCricket, 31 mars 2012 - 08:26 .


#44533
CrutchCricket

CrutchCricket
  • Members
  • 7 750 messages

Ieldra2 wrote...

You know what makes me think you may be right? The horrible mess of ME3's ending. If they could fubar that without coonsciously trying I can believe they'd character-assassinate Miranda without trying. It's as if some noob of a writer sat on her part for half an hour.

Well if you put it that way... they don't spend enough time on Miranda and end up ruining her. They don't spend enough time on the endings and they ruin that along with everything. All these other cuts and problems. Makes you wonder... just what the hell DID they spend time on?:lol:

#44534
keegdarv1

keegdarv1
  • Members
  • 242 messages
no im sorry I dont' believe complaints changed anything. no email shows up on Liara terminal until after that characters mission seems no different, I know people want Cerberus closure I figured their be something myself but I'm guessing the writes went with she quit her job in ME2 closure done. maybe complaints changed that finally email but I don't know I doubt much if anythink was really changed from complaints

and they didnt hear complaints and say heck lets make where she lives, aren't some of you believes theirs no chance at a Miranda dlc because getting Yvonne Strahovsk would cost to much and be to hard but you believe in the three four months after the leak they got her to come back in for alittle lets make where she can live.

as sad as it is out of all the comm talk you get it seems she was given maybe the best romanced and unromanced(not that's saying much)

as for character change I agree and disagree with that. the fact she romanceable can be used in the wants to be normal side, the way she watchs over her sister, the look she gives when sees her with her faimly and the way she says faimly can all be used in the she wants a normal life camp.

I dont think thoughs were her driving forces but they were apart of her charcter, she has two sides the buisness and personal side the problem is ME3 takes away one side of her character but she was given a smaller role and with a samller role its hard to give a character more then one side or more the one focus, but to be honest much ME3 characters have one focus

Thane- his illness
Sarama-for two games it's been her daughters
Jack-her student
Mordin-the cure
Wrex- the cure

same goes for the squard members theeir just hidden better because of more time with them and banter

Liara-work infact if you don't romance her 95% of all talks are about work
Ashley-mistrust, to the point that even if romance her she gives of a vibe she doesn't trust you till you destory Cerberus
Garrus- out of character, I'm sorry I dont buy the I'm am leader of my people after two games of "I suck at being a turian"
Tali-her homeworld
Edi-what's my purpose
Javik-kill reapers and anything else isn't important

The problem isn't that Miranda's main purpose is her sister it's that her sister is missing for the whole game that just doesn't make sense to me. If I was bioware I would have waited to make Oriana go missing after the Citadel attack. Until that point it would make sense for two things Miranda is helping in some way to figure out what Cerberus is doing or something. Or after mars you meet Miranda on the Citadel as your leaving she could join the team until the Citadel attack, where you have banter and such and even could walk in on her having a long distance talk with her sister, then after the Citadel her sister would go missing. Their be no need for the comm talk as she was their and she could inform you better then Anderson or Hackett about Kei Lang. The next time you see her is the talk on the Citadel but it only comes up after Rannoch is all finished. Let sanctuary play out the same, but as add that if you didn't leave a mission after sanctuary(their's alteast one N7 mission can wait to do after) she wont get back in time and be apart of hammer for comm talk at end but if mission left she get back from putting her sister somewhere safe she could rejoin squard be apart of Cerberus headquaters and earth.

sorry for the long ass post don't come by much getting it all out at once ingore if you want

#44535
keegdarv1

keegdarv1
  • Members
  • 242 messages

CrutchCricket wrote...

Ieldra2 wrote...

You know what makes me think you may be right? The horrible mess of ME3's ending. If they could fubar that without coonsciously trying I can believe they'd character-assassinate Miranda without trying. It's as if some noob of a writer sat on her part for half an hour.

Well if you put it that way... they don't spend enough time on Miranda and end up ruining her. They don't spend enough time on the endings and they ruin that along with everything. All these other cuts and problems. Makes you wonder... just what the hell DID they spend time on?:lol:



 how much Liara could they put im one game

#44536
Dr. Doctor

Dr. Doctor
  • Members
  • 4 331 messages
The thing is that none of the characters in ME3 other than Garrus and Liara get much in the way of interaction with Shepard. The VS has about the same amount of dialogue as the ME2 LI's and is stuck in Zaeed-mode 95% of the time if you bring them onto the Normandy.

#44537
flemm

flemm
  • Members
  • 5 786 messages

CrutchCricket wrote...

Where is the underlined coming from? I think that's the assumption that's throwing you off. What evidence do you have for it?



Let's take a look at the LotSB dossier. These dossiers tend to reflect the main direction for characters in ME3 (not just Miranda's dossier), as do the little snippets of video, Liara's comments on the LIs, etc. It's not always a perfect fit (some things do change in the course of development, but that is the pattern).

Miranda's dossier contains a lot of information, more than anyone else's, a lot of it is completely new information, and it is more jarring than anyone else's because it doesn't fit with Miranda's prior characterisation.

This can't plausibly be chalked up to a lack of effort or planning, since a lack of these things doesn't normally produce a heap of new information, obviously.

Miranda's LotSB dossier tells a little story, and this story is a complete reworking of the character from top to bottom. Some of the following could be said to be unconfirmed prior to ME3, but in ME3, it is confirmed for the most part. This is only really scratching the surface, but a few relevant points:

1) Miranda was devoted to Cerberus because of an obsession with human dominance. This directly contradicts all of Miranda's dialogue on the subject, or related subjects, in ME2. Thus her motivations were evil (and retro-actively in conformity with the more shallow view of Cerberus presented in ME3), lacking the nuance that the ME2 dialogue suggests is present.

2) The Lazurus project awakened in Miranda a desire for children, which gradually replaced her devotion to Cerberus. This is a good, healthy motivation that gradually replaces the evil motivation that was initially present. Miranda doesn't say a thing about wanting children in ME2, she talks about wanting to be a part of Humanity's STG, and other things along those lines. Not that Miranda shouldn't want children, but there's no reason to introduce the idea as incompatible with her other ambitions (see below).

3) Tragically, she discovers she can't have children because she is infertile. Another completely new piece of information that can't really be accounted for with the idea that nobody was really paying attention to Miranda at the time. (Nevermind that it's nonsense.)

4) Combined with the overall progression above, certain details, like the change in reading material from a scientific journal to a romance magazine or whatever it is, suggests that the dossier is introducing a dichotomy that didn't exist previously, between Miranda's professional side and her more personal/emotional side, i.e. that her devotion to work was only compensation for an underdeveloped family life. This is a sexist cliché.

Does this reworking of the character have an impact in ME3? It absolutely does. Do you realize that Miranda in ME3 *never has any dialogue/interaction of substance* with anyone other than Shepard, Oriana and (momentarily) her father? This suggests that the above cliché is actually driving the writing to such an extreme that it has become tabou for Miranda to even *speak* to anyone outside of her immediate family, other than the protagonist (who is often a romantic partner anyway).

Now, we can discuss the extent to which other details of the role compensate for this somewhat.

But I don't think we can plausibly say that this was an accident. LMAO.

Modifié par flemm, 31 mars 2012 - 09:11 .


#44538
jtav

jtav
  • Members
  • 13 965 messages
flemm, don't take this the wrong way but I think I'm going to be sick.

#44539
flemm

flemm
  • Members
  • 5 786 messages

jtav wrote...

flemm, don't take this the wrong way but I think I'm going to be sick.


Sorry Image IPB 

But only by purging the bullsh*t, i.e. identifying it fully for what it is, can we be free of it lol Image IPB

#44540
jtav

jtav
  • Members
  • 13 965 messages
And of course, if her motives are retconned, she's no longer the genuine idealist who can reform Cerberus. She herself needs to be saved via love or die. Preferably die.

#44541
ThomGau

ThomGau
  • Members
  • 554 messages

flemm wrote...

jtav wrote...

flemm, don't take this the wrong way but I think I'm going to be sick.


Sorry Image IPB 

But only by purging the bullsh*t, i.e. identifying it fully for what it is, can we be free of it lol Image IPB


Fight fire with fire right ?
When it comes to this subject, sadly it doesn't work. What have they done :(?

I would be curious to know what's the outlook on ME3 Miranda from a new player to the series, just to see how much the figure she was in ME2 was distorted.

Modifié par ThomGau, 31 mars 2012 - 09:31 .


#44542
Dr. Doctor

Dr. Doctor
  • Members
  • 4 331 messages
What I don't get is what exactly happened to Cerberus. They're experiments into controlling the Reapers were close to working, so what? TIM becomes indoctrinated and that tech is still laying around somewhere? What about the components Brynn's cell was working on? There's this whole plotline that just fades into nothing because we blew up TIM's office.

#44543
Vertigo_1

Vertigo_1
  • Members
  • 5 934 messages
I think you're focussing too much on the LotSB intel flemm, likely more than the devs intended :blink:

And yeah there's a few plot points that don't lead anywhere in ME3...again I point the blame at a rushed game (and trying to get so much into said game).

Modifié par Vertigo_1, 31 mars 2012 - 09:49 .


#44544
Ieldra

Ieldra
  • Members
  • 25 190 messages

flemm wrote...

jtav wrote...

flemm, don't take this the wrong way but I think I'm going to be sick.


Sorry Image IPB 
But only by purging the bullsh*t, i.e. identifying it fully for what it is, can we be free of it lol Image IPB

It increasingly appears that Miranda's character in ME3 should be treated like the endings: best completely rewritten, apart from the romance and a nice line here or there. Can you believe I hadn't realized how bad things were until you summarized things?

I wonder why Bioware wanted to rework Miranda. What was so damned inacceptable about us liking her for what she was in ME2? Purging the bullsh*t, yeah. That's what needs to be done. How much do you bet that Bioware, if they react to this in the first place, will try to sell it all as "character growth"? I call bullsh*t on that proactively. Just in case.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 31 mars 2012 - 09:51 .


#44545
CrutchCricket

CrutchCricket
  • Members
  • 7 750 messages

flemm wrote...

Let's take a look at the LotSB dossier. These dossiers tend to reflect the main direction for characters in ME3 (not just Miranda's dossier), as do the little snippets of video, Liara's comments on the LIs, etc. It's not always a perfect fit (some things do change in the course of development, but that is the pattern).

Miranda's dossier contains a lot of information, more than anyone else's, a lot of it is completely new information, and it is more jarring than anyone else's because it doesn't fit with Miranda's prior characterisation.

This can't plausibly be chalked up to a lack of effort or planning, since a lack of these things doesn't normally produce a heap of new information, obviously.

Miranda's LotSB dossier tells a little story, and this story is a complete reworking of the character from top to bottom. Some of the following could be said to be unconfirmed prior to ME3, but in ME3, it is confirmed for the most part. This is only really scratching the surface, but a few relevant points:

1) Miranda was devoted to Cerberus because of an obsession with human dominance. This directly contradicts all of Miranda's dialogue on the subject, or related subjects, in ME2. Thus her motivations were evil (and retro-actively in conformity with the more shallow view of Cerberus presented in ME3), lacking the nuance that the ME2 dialogue suggests is present.

2) The Lazurus project awakened in Miranda a desire for children, which gradually replaced her devotion to Cerberus. This is a good, healthy motivation that gradually replaces the evil motivation that was initially present. Miranda doesn't say a thing about wanting children in ME2, she talks about wanting to be a part of Humanity's STG, and other things along those lines. Not that Miranda shouldn't want children, but there's no reason to introduce the idea as incompatible with her other ambitions (see below).

3) Tragically, she discovers she can't have children because she is infertile. Another completely new piece of information that can't really be accounted for with the idea that nobody was really paying attention to Miranda at the time. (Nevermind that it's nonsense.)

4) Combined with the overall progression above, certain details, like the change in reading material from a scientific journal to a romance magazine or whatever it is, suggests that the dossier is introducing a dichotomy that didn't exist previously, between Miranda's professional side and her more personal/emotional side, i.e. that her devotion to work was only compensation for an underdeveloped family life. This is a sexist cliché.

Does this reworking of the character have an impact in ME3? It absolutely does. Do you realize that Miranda in ME3 *never has any dialogue/interaction of substance* with anyone other than Shepard, Oriana and (momentarily) her father? This suggests that the above cliché is actually driving the writing to such an extreme that it has become tabou for Miranda to even *speak* to anyone outside of her immediate family, other than the protagonist (who is often a romantic partner anyway).

Now, we can discuss the extent to which other details of the role compensate for this somewhat.

But I don't think we can plausibly say that this was an accident. LMAO.

I don't know as much about the other dossiers having not read or discussed them for some time. At this point I'll have to take your word for it that they're consistent (I'm not accepting a causal or predicitive relationship just yet) with their roles in ME3. But let's just focus on Miranda. What do we have? The intro blurb (with the dreaded "human dominance obsession", oh noes), the dating chat logs, the talk with Oriana and the doctor's note. Here's how they fit:
The blurb is inaccurate and bad writing, in game and out. Granted the first is an interpretation but not one that's a stretch given how the majority of people in the ME universe see Cerberus as villains (and indeed it's only the Lazarus cell that actually shows a different face). Out of universe, it's shorthand for Cerberus as villians, keeping with the "keep it simple" principle. Keep in mind though "villain Cerberus" and "Miranda's connection" are two separate entities. And seeing as Miranda isn't with Cerberus in ME3, even though she doesn't comment on how/why she left, that divide is sufficient to dismiss the claim that she's obsessed with human dominance. The only logical result is to consider the blurb erronous.
The dating chatlogs necessarily happen pre-ME2 and are consistent with Miranda's character prior to the game. Wanting kids is not character assassination and there is no evidence that she was planning on leaving for a "normal life"  once she did have a kid. Indeed pre-ME2 Miranda fully believed in Cerberus even if you go the wrong route with the human dominance nonsense.
The Oriana logs are again bad writing. It is a flat out contradiction for Miranda to be presented as a hypercompent operative and scientist and yet be that awkward with her own sister over a damn chat room.
Finally the doctor's note and the infertility have been debunked to death and given they're not mentioned again I think it's safe to say we can finally forget about them.

Now to your specific points:
(1) Miranda not being with Cerberus disproves this. If she were obsessed with human dominance why is she still not with Cerberus? Like I said above portraying Cerberus as villains and Miranda are two completely separate things.
(2) I doubt Lazarus did anything of the sort. Like I said the dating chat logs were pre-ME2. Also she displays no overt desire for kids in ME3 anyway (see my posts a few pages back about the normal life marriage and children line)
(3)Dealt with.
(4)Seriously? I didn't take that seriously 6 months ago why would I start now? Maybe the science mag was bull**** and she's allowed to like fashion? I'm sorry but I didn't get  the personal/professional dichotomy from the dossiers. I got it from discussing it here. If this is the reasoning it came from, maybe I should deny it outright.

#44546
Ieldra

Ieldra
  • Members
  • 25 190 messages

Visii wrote...
Hey everyone.

We're putting together a list of letters regarding the treatment of the ME2 LI's in ME3. We know a few people going to PAX, so if you have anything to say, PM me and we'll send it along!

@all:
Just want to remind everyone not to forget to send Visii some comments.

#44547
Nightwriter

Nightwriter
  • Members
  • 9 800 messages
I've been trying to put together something concise and articulate, but I fear it will be up to better minds than I. I always end up writing too much.

#44548
cbutz

cbutz
  • Members
  • 560 messages
Ill send something later tonight, when does visii need it?

#44549
MisterJB

MisterJB
  • Members
  • 15 596 messages

Ieldra2 wrote...
Can you believe I hadn't realized how bad things were until you summarized things?

Seconded.
What appeared to be a simple dissapointment brough on by bad writing and time and budget constraints has been to revealed to be a slow and deliberate character assassination that some saw coming.

#44550
flemm

flemm
  • Members
  • 5 786 messages

Vertigo_1 wrote...

I think you're focussing too much on the LotSB intel flemm, likely more than the devs intended :blink:


Perhaps, but the question was: what evidence is there that some of the problems with Miranda's characterisation in ME3 are not accidental? There is plenty of evidence that many are not.

The devs may not have intended for some of this to be apparent, or for it to add up quite the way it does. 
 
But sadly, it is there. Also, sometimes clichés get the better of creators. Not everything that fits into certain ways of thinking or portraying characters is fully conscious. For example, the lack of any banter/interaction with other characters may be most directly due to not wanting to raise the whole issue of Miranda's previous association with Cerberus. Irrelevant, because it still plays into the problematic line of thinking I described above.


@Crutch... I'm not sure what to say about your assertion that it is "bad writing." Other than to respond: Yes, it is Image IPB

Modifié par flemm, 31 mars 2012 - 10:23 .