82210 réponses à ce sujet

[MassStorm]

naledgeborn wrote...

MassStorm wrote...

LOL Liara is so strong that even in the thread where people should speak about Miranda they end up speaking about Liara.

And you're thread is so lame you have to jump into Miranda's to get some exciting conversation. 

You know you are right but fortunately i can come here and listen all the Liara discussions you (and other Mirimancers) are posting. I should thank you 

Modifié par MassStorm, 05 décembre 2011 - 03:48 .

[naledgeborn]

@ Crutch

Gathering information at a dig site =/= gathering information behind enemy lines. But somehow Mac thinks it does.

[CrutchCricket]

hhh89 wrote...
 Plus, you have a lot more contact with people, and Liara in ME seemed more of an introverse and timid person, who find difficult to talk with people, while in ME2 she seems more capable. Of course, a person may change during the years, but in general the personality don't change much after you're an adult, and she was already and adult in ME.
If we're talking stricly about ME2, though, I find her the one with the best ability to run a organization like the one under the control of the SB, with one exception that I've already said.

Maybe she did it all online at the beginning? As we all know even the shyest person can suddenly become "internet tough guy"... for better or worse.

[jtav]

I actually did try to explain Liara's character change in Persistence of Memory. A one shot to tie that off is my next project. Of course, I probably will be lynched for pairing them these days.

[The Elder King]

jtav wrote...

Just a thought: maybe we should knock it off with the Liara bashing? Some of us still do like both women. I still ship them. Miranda getting a vastly smaller role doesn't change that.

I agree. One of the reason for that I don't mind much the squad in ME3 is that I like all the squadmates from ME and ME2. So I'm fine even if my favourites aren't in the squad.

@flemm: Garrus has a massively importan role in ME3? Could you send a PM with the info?

[CrutchCricket]

naledgeborn wrote...

@ Crutch

Gathering information at a dig site =/= gathering information behind enemy lines. But somehow Mac thinks it does.

Obviously. I didn't equate them. I said they have common ground. Though come to think of it, where'd you get the "behind enemy lines" bit? If you want to put it in terms of spies, she's a best an analyst, not a field agent.

[Xilizhra]

As monotone and boring as the character I'm sure.

There's less to angst about, and people talk far more about that which makes them unhappy than that which makes them happy. Combining that with not having actually played the game yet, and we're in something of a lull at the moment.

He made a tactical decision and it was the best one to make in that battle.

No it wasn't. He evidently misjudged the strength of the Fifth Fleet, among other things.

Gimme 2 months and I'll write you a working story why Liara became the SB
Gimme another 2 months and I'll write a story that gives Miranda a proper background (far more than just "daddy issues" and "I'm genetically perfect".
And gimme a full year and I rewrite you ME1, ME2 and ME3 so it works.

Seriously ... some issues in the ME series could have been avoided so easily. One thing irks me most: lack of proper character development in ME2. Some got really good development, others feel incomplete. Miranda is one of the better examples, however, I wished the devs had added more background to her. Especially her years before Cerberus. If she had a lover before Shepard ... you name it.

Do note that we're looking at all of this in hindsight, and considering that everything about the final project is finished. our task to revise things after everything is done is far, far easier than actually making the game was.

About the character assassination, I have to say that it shouldn'be the role of the comic to develop some characters of the game (maybe some minor characters, like Anderson, that hasn't a lot of space on the game, not a squadmate like Liara). The problem for me is that I don't find this type of character development/assassination necessary for Liara.

I disagree about the necessity, but I'd rather that she have gotten something other than a comic for it.

[flemm]

CptData wrote...
 One thing irks me most: lack of proper character development in ME2. Some got really good development, others feel incomplete.

To a point maybe, but overall the character development in ME2 is much more thorough than in ME1. Which isn't to say it's perfect , or that it's not better in some cases than in others, but overall it's a strong point of the game. If anything, ME2's weakness is too much character material, too little story. So you end up with some pretty strong characters that don't feel relevant at all to the story, and you don't get to spend much time with them.

hhh89 wrote...

@flemm: Garrus has a massively importan role in ME3? Could you send a PM with the info?

Well, massive in the sense that he's a nobody, and then... he's very much not. It's been a while since I looked at the specifics.

Modifié par flemm, 05 décembre 2011 - 03:50 .

[CrutchCricket]

Xilizhra wrote...

He made a tactical decision and it was the best one to make in that battle.

No it wasn't. He evidently misjudged the strength of the Fifth Fleet, among other things.

Explain?

[naledgeborn]

CrutchCricket wrote...

Obviously. I didn't equate them. I said they have common ground. Though come to think of it, where'd you get the "behind enemy lines" bit? If you want to put it in terms of spies, she's a best an analyst, not a field agent.

Sometimes, more often than people believe, desk jockies have to go into the field. Liara doesn't strike me as the adaptable, blend-in cloak-n-dagger type.

Edit: I'm taking a break, I'm clouded and jaded, and I'm starting to get more excited than I'd like to about a fictional character's merits.

Modifié par naledgeborn, 05 décembre 2011 - 03:51 .

[Xilizhra]

CrutchCricket wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

He made a tactical decision and it was the best one to make in that battle.

No it wasn't. He evidently misjudged the strength of the Fifth Fleet, among other things.

Explain?

The Fifth Fleet defeated the geth without sustaining damage significant enough to effect the final battle with Sovereign. Your Shepard failed to discern that and the cost was in thousands of lives, political stability, and some sort of nastiness in ME3.

[CrutchCricket]

naledgeborn wrote...
Sometimes, more often than people believe, desk jockies have to go into the field. Liara doesn't strike me as the adaptable, blend-in cloak-n-dagger type.

Does the Shadow Broker ever go in the field?

[naledgeborn]

CrutchCricket wrote...

naledgeborn wrote...
Sometimes, more often than people believe, desk jockies have to go into the field. Liara doesn't strike me as the adaptable, blend-in cloak-n-dagger type.

Does the Shadow Broker ever go in the field?

He certainly started as a field agent. As the prior SB's elite operator

[CptData]

flemm wrote...

CptData wrote...
 One thing irks me most: lack of proper character development in ME2. Some got really good development, others feel incomplete.

To a point maybe, but overall the character development in ME2 is much more thorough than in ME1. Which isn't to say it's perfect , or that it's not better in some cases than in others, but overall it's a strong point of the game. If anything, ME2's weakness is too much character material, too little story. So you end up with some pretty strong characters that don't feel relevant at all to the story, and you don't get to spend much time with them.

I don't think so, but I also don't wanna hijack Miri's thread for a debate about that. I think out of the guys in ME2 only Mordin got a "perfect" background - means, he's one of the best developed characters in the entire series, maybe THE best.
Miranda is okay, but feels a bit one-dimensional. And yes, same for most of the guys in ME1 with exception of ... surprise ... Ashley. All the other characters in ME1 had a more or less believeable background and most (if not all of them) had more development than the guys in ME2.

In my "headcanon" Miranda has far more complicated story than Cerberus and daddy issues. I'd go so far and say, the story of her and Orianna needs far more development than we saw in ME2. It's a beautiful thought Miranda IS caring of someone and that's her sister. The cold "icequeen" has a heart. I love it and it was difficult for my Shepards not to feel more than what works as friendship for her.

Whatever, enough about that. Overall, I'm not happy with character development of ME2 cast. Too many guys tbh.

Modifié par CptData, 05 décembre 2011 - 03:58 .

[CrutchCricket]

Xilizhra wrote...
The Fifth Fleet defeated the geth without sustaining damage significant enough to effect the final battle with Sovereign. Your Shepard failed to discern that and the cost was in thousands of lives, political stability, and some sort of nastiness in ME3.

Is it possible that a commander on the ground would not be able to determine the precise fleet strengths in the battle above him? Say he had enough info about the Fifth. Did he have enough about the geth beyond a "****-ton of ships"? No. There was no way he could've predicted they would come out unscathed. Besides Sovereign was the real threat. Concentrate fire and all that.

[Xilizhra]

CrutchCricket wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...
The Fifth Fleet defeated the geth without sustaining damage significant enough to effect the final battle with Sovereign. Your Shepard failed to discern that and the cost was in thousands of lives, political stability, and some sort of nastiness in ME3.

Is it possible that a commander on the ground would not be able to determine the precise fleet strengths in the battle above him? Say he had enough info about the Fifth. Did he have enough about the geth beyond a "****-ton of ships"? No. There was no way he could've predicted they would come out unscathed. Besides Sovereign was the real threat. Concentrate fire and all that.

Evidently there was a way he could have predicted it, given that predicting it was an option.

[CrutchCricket]

naledgeborn wrote...

He certainly started as a field agent. As the prior SB's elite operator

Right. The Yagh individual did. But did his master? The person in the Shadow Broker position never seems to go into the field. Therefore it must be possible to do the job (at least to a certain extent) without being personally involved.

[flemm]

CptData wrote...

Whatever, enough about that. Overall, I'm not happy with character development of ME2 cast. Too many guys tbh.

Too many characters I can agree with, but for other reasons. As for how much you know about each of them individually, though, there's really no comparison between, say, Thane in ME2 and Garrus in ME1. You know more about Thane. It's not even close, really. But that's generally true. Garrus, of course, gets more development in ME2 as well, but that's in ME2.

[Ieldra]

jtav wrote...
I'm over my resentment of Liara. Not having her present would be just as jarring as Miranda's seeming absence for certain developments. There are two major plots that cry out for her commentary. I'll miss Miranda, and there will be wistful sighs every time I talk to Liara on the SR-2, but I can't begrudge Liara her narrative role.

The thing is, she really should have a mostly off-screen role given that she's the SB. They contrived a reason to put her on the team and contrived a reason to keep Miranda out of it. That's why I won't be over my resentment any time soon, even though Liara is OK as a character. I repeat they better make up for that slight in Miranda's story.

[CrutchCricket]

Xilizhra wrote...
Evidently there was a way he could have predicted it, given that predicting it was an option.

No he didn't predict it. The save option says "save the DA no matter the cost". Potentially decimate your strength and not be enough to stop Sovereign from unleashing the entire Reaper fleet, just to save the DA. Foolish. The fact that it worked does not redeem the reasoning.

Modifié par CrutchCricket, 05 décembre 2011 - 04:02 .

[naledgeborn]

CrutchCricket wrote...

naledgeborn wrote...

He certainly started as a field agent. As the prior SB's elite operator

Right. The Yagh individual did. But did his master? The person in the Shadow Broker position never seems to go into the field. Therefore it must be possible to do the job (at least to a certain extent) without being personally involved.

Point being you need the training. If the intel that the SB is analyzing doesn't match up with the intel the SB's agents are bringing in you have to be able to see the red flags. A field agent would be able to spot the indescrepencies in the paper work... the old Sb didn't which is probably why he fell to a coup. And there's countless other unaccounted contingencies where intelligence training is essential.

The fact that an untrained archaeologist can just jump in and take care of business because of one or two occupational overlaps says to me thst the whole thing is complete and utter bullsh*t.

Modifié par naledgeborn, 05 décembre 2011 - 04:11 .

[Ieldra]

CrutchCricket wrote...
Though I get the feeling this may open a can of worms similar to the Collector Base argument I will say that allowing the council to die is the correct pragmatic decision. That depends of course on how you do it. You can tell the fleet to focus on Sovereign or you can tell them to hold back and let the Destiny's Ascension bite the dust simply because you're just a dick. I always pick the first option. If the DA is keeping the geth busy, you better believe all of my ships are going for Sovereign.

FWIW, I agree with you here. I can interpret the scenario differently, but I cannot justify saving the Council without adding to the scenario. Nonetheless, my main Shepard has saved them for metagame reasons. Should I get a better story with a dead Council, I'll replay him from the end of ME1.

[CptData]

flemm wrote...

CptData wrote...

Whatever, enough about that. Overall, I'm not happy with character development of ME2 cast. Too many guys tbh.

Too many characters I can agree with, but for other reasons. As for how much you know about each of them individually, though, there's really no comparison between, say, Thane in ME2 and Garrus in ME1. You know more about Thane. It's not even close, really. But that's generally true. Garrus, of course, gets more development in ME2 as well, but that's in ME2.

Thane is one of the guys who got more development and still feels a bit one-dimensional. He claims that he can re-experience any memory, but he showed us only very few, especially the one with his wife. Thane is reduced to that memory, which isn't fair.
The funny thing is: I like Thane, but I'm not sure if he contributes much to the story. He does, however, do his part to make the ME universe deeper: we learn more about the Hanar and the Drell.

I had this talk multiple times already - I'd reduce the roster of ME2 from 12+1 (including DLC characters) to 8. Miranda is one of the characters that will stay since she has a lot of influence on the story. Jacob is another one. Think both DLC-characters have to go plus Grunt plus Jack and Morinth. The last one never got real character development anyway. Don't get me wrong, I like those characters, however, they're not really needed for the story. They could be still in the game, but non-recruitable characters or characters used for one or two missions (like Liara in LotSB).
That reduced roster is still enough to beat the SM without losses imo.

A smaller roster also means less recruiting missions, less loyalizing mission and therefore more time and money for proper character development of the remaining cast.

[flemm]

Ieldra2 wrote...
 They contrived a reason to put her on the team and contrived a reason to keep Miranda out of it.

To me this is really the main point.  In the leaked script, the plot contrivances designed to keep Miranda on the sidelines aren't even convincing. They amount to "This is where Miranda should probably join up, but she stubs her toe, so it doesn't happen." *Mild exaggeration for emphasis*

Now, granted, we weren't supposed to see this, so I have to imagine this will receive some work one way or another in the final version. But the examples of Liara and Garrus are relevant in that they show to what extent the devs can make characters (even *might be dead* ones) very important on a whim. I'm fine with that, but not so much with the opposite in Miranda's case.

Edit: As Ieldra points out, this is not bashing at all, it's simply a relevant comparison.

CptData wrote...
A smaller roster also means less recruiting
missions, less loyalizing mission and therefore more time and money for
proper character development of the remaining cast.

I agree that a smaller roster would have been better. However, I think that's a separate question than character development. It's true that Thane isn't relevant to ME2's plot, but was Garrus relevant to that of ME1? Not that I recall, in fact I don't think you even need to recruit him, nothing changes.

Modifié par flemm, 05 décembre 2011 - 04:17 .

[Ieldra]

jtav wrote...
Just a thought: maybe we should knock it off with the Liara bashing? Some of us still do like both women. I still ship them. Miranda getting a vastly smaller role doesn't change that.

Knock off bashing is OK with me. But I don't have the praise the character and ignore that what was done with her was contrived to keep her in, while what was done with Miranda was contrived to keep her out. Not that the results cannot be good either way. Theoretically - we'll see. But I still resent it until I see on my screen that Miranda hasn't suffered from it.

Modifié par Ieldra2, 05 décembre 2011 - 04:14 .