6970 réponses à ce sujet

[feliciano2040]

Seboist wrote...

True, they don't recognize TIM as the superior character.

Shush, everything will be alright friend.

*prepares potasium clorate injection*

[Dave of Canada]

Xilizhra wrote...

Erm, does this have context?

No, was writing something down for a project and decided to change a few words around. Decided to share before handing it in.

[Sebby]

Dave is a master of literature. That's how he became part of the Cerberus blood brotherhood.

[Dean_the_Young]

feliciano2040 wrote...

Doesn't mean he isn't one, it just means the player is not forced to having to know about military tactics.

Whether the player knows it or not would be irrelevant to Shepard showing any of it. Which is the point: nothing demonstrates Shepard as a military leader he's claimed to be.

You have to understand that Mass Effect, as a videogame, even more so as an RPG, needs to allow the player a great deal of inmersion to allow the story to be effective. As cool as it would be for you to see military strategizing in Mass Effect, it's not gonna happen because:

A) We'd have to see it in cutscenes or in non-controlled dialogue, and that would break inmersion.

A professed military character having a military demeanor in cutscenes or dialogue would break the immersion that you are, in fact, controling a military character?

That makes no sense. It'd be like roleplaying a knight who makes no reference or has no manerisms of a knight, and then claiming that including such would be an immersion breaker because it would require people to have a superficial understanding of what being a knight involves.

We'd have to know and understand the complexity of military tactics, and some people just aren't interested, that's their right as well.

No, you wouldn't.

C) It serves no purpose to the main story, if you guys like to see that so much, then read a Tom Clancy novel, I'd rather deal with the other MUCH more interesting thematic components of the game, the ones that are not filler. 

It serves the purpose of the main story by reinforcing the premise of the main character: that Shepard is a badass space marine and a superb leader, rather than some guy with a gun who sleeps with people after five conversations.

It's not free to hire military advisors you know  ? Even EA is not going to give them a blank check to curtail to every little fans' nitpicking, and seeing Shepard issuing military commands IS nitpicking, apart from missing the point of how it interferes with the role-playing aspect.

Who needs a blank check? We're talking about feedback, not buying a tank.

There are millions of veterans who love to comment on it who could offer advice for peanuts, if not for free. Moreover, if you hire an ex-military person into Bioware, you're already paying them a paycheck for other things as well.

Sense. There is none present  !

A character is nothing more than the product of the skill and talent of a writer, if you think a character is not good enough it has nothing to do with the character, because he doesn't exist ! He's not a living person with responsibility for his actions.

If you have, if you so need to hold anyone accountable, then do so with the writer, precisely the one at fault (according to you).

I'm not blaming Shepard for him/her not being an awesome soldier and leader: I'm saying he/she isn't one by all depictions. The reason Shepard fails as a military/leadership character is because of the authors, but that doesn't change what he is (or is not) presented as.

Sense. It helps to understand it before you abuse it.

You're gonna make bleed of laughter  !

It's just a selling quote dude, same as "They say it's a suicide mission, PROVE THEM WRONG".

Don't take everything so literally, it's just made to get people riled up, it's not that the writer nor Shepard actually believe that's the goddamn plan !

And yet, they could easily have had a selling quote that fit a leadership/soldier figure. That's just the wasted characterization that takes away from what Shepard is claimed to be (a professional leader) and what he actually is presented as (nothing of the sort).

Bioware chooses these selling quotes that undermine Shepard's status as a leader, without giving the non-selling basis that would actually warrant Shepard's status as a leader. Which is why the selling quote sums it up nicely: Shepard is talk, not substance, as a leader.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 11 décembre 2011 - 12:44 .

[Sebby]

Saphra Deden wrote...

The mission that really stands out for me is Virmire. Shepard landed and got his team and his ship trapped for no reason. He couldn't scan those defenses from orbit and then decide on a course of action?

In most other missions I'll grant that Shepard generally shows a solid ability to adapt to a changing environment.

I think that perhaps EDI in ME2 overshadows Shepard. Often she is the one to point out what the objectives should be and how to reach them. It might have been better if Shepard was the one to do this more often.

Granted there are a few places where Shepard CAN do this based on the dialogue you take.

EDIT

Horizon is the other big offender. Shepard lands with his two squaddies and intends to do... what exactly? He doesn't know about the guns yet. All he knows is that there is a huge ship parked over the colony and the VS is somewhere in the area. What's his plan to defeat the the Collectors here?

It's a huge plothole and it makes Shepard look like an idiot.

That said, the SM is one of the few places Shepard actually takes some initiative. He can suggest explosives and when told that won't work he instead suggests stealth. That's a start.

Your mentioning of Horizon and Virmire reminded me about one of the few good things about ME3, the Normandy FINALLY being used for close air support.

[feliciano2040]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Whether the player knows it or not would be irrelevant to Shepard showing any of it. Which is the point: nothing demonstrates Shepard as a military leader he's claimed to be.

But that's precisely the problem, YOU are supposed to be Shepard. If he/she suddenly takes too many scenes where he/she speaks for himself and acts on his own, then you lose inmersion, it becomes redundant and pointless to control him if the game is going to grab him away from you and separate you from the experience.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

That makes no sense. It'd be like roleplaying a knight who makes no reference or has no manerisms of a knight, and then claiming that including such would be an immersion breaker because it would require people to have a superficial understanding of what being a knight involves.

There's a difference between showing your character speaking in "ye olde english" and having another issuing naval orders in the middle of a cutscene, because it's not YOU who's saying them, it's that character on the screen called Shepard.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

It serves the purpose of the main story by reinforcing the premise of the main character: that Shepard is a badass space marine and a superb leader, rather than some guy with a gun who sleeps with people after five conversations.

He's already a space marine and a superb leader, only that we don't get to see him directly giving orders on the scene or having to make excessively complicated plans because that would require for the game itself to take over Shepard, and thus, separating him from the player.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Who needs a blank check? We're talking about feedback, not buying a tank.

There are millions of veterans who love to comment on it who could offer advice for peanuts, if not for free.

Millions of veterans ? MILLIONS ? Working FOR FREE ?

How old are you ? I'm 23.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

I'm not blaming Shepard for him/her not being an awesome soldier and leader: I'm saying he/she isn't one by all depictions. The reason Shepard fails as a military/leadership character is because of the authors, but that doesn't change what he is (or is not) presented as.

Sense. It helps to understand it before you abuse it.

He is, but for the purposes of role-playing, because it's a game sold to an audience made up of 99% of non-military personnel, it's going to be made without much focus on-screen on Shepard throwing orders around and making plans for military movilizations because:

A) It separates Shepard from the player, thus breaking inmersion.

It would have to be made only in cutscenes, or forcing Shepard to use large quantities of automatic dialogue, which would lead us to "A" again.

C) If inserted into the gameplay, it would require players to have a moderate degree of tactic military knowledge, which they don't, and it would be hassling to the players, because, this is not military simulator, it's space opera..

D) It would be BORING AS F***, I don't want to see Shepard arranging fleets for five minutes, I want that to happen off-screen, why ? Because I'd much rather have Shepard on a fighter jet shooting the living crap out of a reaper.

Dean_the_Young wrote...

And yet, they could easily have had a selling quote that fit a leadership/soldier figure. That's just the wasted characterization that takes away from what Shepard is claimed to be (a professional leader) and what he actually is presented as (nothing of the sort).

Bioware chooses these selling quotes that undermine Shepard's status as a leader, without giving the non-selling basis that would actually warrant Shepard's status as a leader. Which is why the selling quote sums it up nicely: Shepard is talk, not substance, as a leader.

I sometimes can't believe some people in this forum, if I didn't know better, I'd say they hate the Mass Effect series do to the insane amounts of BS they complain about.

Seriously, saying that a PROMOTIONAL piece of dialogue shown only to encourage people to buy the game is actual proof of "wasted characterization" is simply complaining about the uncomplainable. Jeez, I don't much like Hudson and Walters, but they sure as hell are right sometimes when they say some players are blatantly ungrateful.

Modifié par feliciano2040, 11 décembre 2011 - 03:17 .

[Dean_the_Young]

[quote]feliciano2040 wrote...

But that's precisely the problem, YOU are supposed to be Shepard. If he/she suddenly takes too many scenes where he/she speaks for himself and acts on his own, then you lose inmersion, it becomes redundant and pointless to control him if the game is going to grab him away from you and separate you from the experience.[/quote]Except this is the exact same situation you're already given: pre-defined dialogue.

Mass Effect has never been an impromptu work in which you got to choose what Shepard would say word for word. They gave you lines to pick from... and it's no less inmersion breaking if those pre-written lines correspond to Shepard's established nature (anti-Reaper, supposedly military) than if it's just the other canon-established.

[quote]
There's a difference between showing your character speaking in "ye olde english" and having another issuing naval orders in the middle of a cutscene, because it's not YOU who's saying them, it's that character on the screen called Shepard.[/quote]And that's what Shepard is. A vaguely pre-defined character with variability but not pure free choice on the part of the player.


[quote]
He's already a space marine and a superb leader, only that we don't get to see him directly giving orders on the scene or having to make excessively complicated plans because that would require for the game itself to take over Shepard, and thus, separating him from the player.[/quote]When the game never shows that he's a space marine or superb leder, it's not supporting the claim. An unsubstantiated claim is a flaw.

You don't need 'excessively complicated plans' to portray a military character. Other fiction has been doing it for millenia, so this is a false objection.




[quote]
Millions of veterans ? MILLIONS ? [/quote]It may surprise you, but there are more militaries than those involved in occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.
[quote]
Working FOR FREE ?[/quote]Did I say that? No. I didn't. So why are you claiming that?
[quote]
How old are you ? I'm 23.[/quote]Unprovable, and irrelevant.

[quote]

He is,[/quote]Where?

[quote]but for the purposes of role-playing, because it's a game sold to an audience made up of 99% of non-military personnel, it's going to be made without much focus on-screen on Shepard throwing orders around and making plans for military movilizations because:

A) It separates Shepard from the player, thus breaking inmersion.[/quote]By your earlier arguments, this is already occuring and so is irrelevant.
[quote]
It would have to be made only in cutscenes, or forcing Shepard to use large quantities of automatic dialogue, which would lead us to "A" again.[/quote]No it wouldn't. Military bearing could have been slipped into the user-selected choices as well.
[quote]
C) If inserted into the gameplay, it would require players to have a moderate degree of tactic military knowledge, which they don't, and it would be hassling to the players, because, this is not military simulator, it's space opera..[/quote]Nonsense. No one is demanding military micro-managing.
[quote]
D) It would be BORING AS F***, I don't want to see Shepard arranging fleets for five minutes, I want that to happen off-screen, why ? Because I'd much rather have Shepard on a fighter jet shooting the living crap out of a reaper.[/quote]Fortunately, no one is suggesting that.

Any other windmills of stray you'd like to tilt at?

[quote]
I sometimes can't believe some people in this forum, if I didn't know better, I'd say they hate the Mass Effect series do to the insane amounts of BS they complain about.[/quote]You don't know better regardless, so feel free to believe any number of erronious things.
[quote]
Seriously, saying that a PROMOTIONAL piece of dialogue shown only to encourage people to buy the game is actual proof of "wasted characterization" is simply complaining about the uncomplainable. Jeez, I don't much like Hudson and Walters, but they sure as hell are right sometimes when they say some players are blatantly ungrateful.
[/quote]Fortunately, that's not what I'm saying. Try to keep up, dear.

[BlueMagitek]

It has been a while, but I remember Shepard has more of a military, eh, I'm not sure of the correct word to use, "personality" in ME 1, especially in the earlier dialogs with Kaiden and Ashley.

[feliciano2040]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Mass Effect has never been an impromptu work in which you got to choose what Shepard would say word for word. They gave you lines to pick from... and it's no less inmersion breaking if those pre-written lines correspond to Shepard's established nature (anti-Reaper, supposedly military) than if it's just the other canon-established.[/quote]

Of course there's a degree to Shepard's character that is universally equal, that doesn't mean the character isn't meant to be you alter ego, and that having him in long scenes, dictating military commands and tactics would break away too much of the time the character spends "being you", again, it would separate the player from Shepard, and it would break inmersion.

And for what ? To see Shepard being more "military".

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

You don't need 'excessively complicated plans' to portray a military character. Other fiction has been doing it for millenia, so this is a false objection.[/quote]

It still would need more time of pre-defined, non-chosen dialogue to express it, which would only result in:

A) Separating Shepard from the player, atributing Shepard's actions only to him/her, and not to the player, completely deviating from the purpose of a role-playing game !

Creating a horde of angry fans saying "Why is Shepard's plan so lame ?!!", people can never be satisfied with anything, as you and plenty of others have demonstrated.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

It may surprise you, but there are more militaries than those involved in occupation of Iraq and Afghanistan.[/quote]

???

Why are you assuming that I would only know about veterans from those two occupations ?

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Did I say that? No. I didn't. So why are you claiming that?[/quote]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

There are millions of veterans who love to comment on it who could offer advice for peanuts, if not for free.[/quote]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Unprovable, and irrelevant.[/quote]

It is relevant to me, I would like to know that I am having a discussion with someone who's mature enough to understand the constraints and limitations of working on videogame development, so far, you haven't proven that.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Where?[/quote]

Are you serious ?

It's not enough that his background is three incredibly memorable missions that granted him consideration by the most prestigious military group in the galaxy ? It's not enough that he leads small teams to victory against mercenaries, geth, krogan, rachni, husks and thresher maws ? It's not enough that he prevented the destruction of the citadel and it's organized government by stopping the most infamous spectre of his time ? It's not enough that he led a team of twelve people into a previously unmapped relay, surviving suicidal odds and anihilating the agents of the same beings who wanted to destroy the galaxy before ?

Oh right, he doesn't issue military commands, he's a bum, my bad man !

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

By your earlier arguments, this is already occuring and so is irrelevant.[/quote]

Not in the same degree as you would want it, inmersion is still there, it's still preserved, your proposal completely obliterates the idea that Shepard is the player at all.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Military bearing could have been slipped into the user-selected choices as well.[/quote]

Indeed, that is a solution, though I can only agree to it if it had no consequence whatsoever in the gameplay, nor the story, unless, like The Suicide Mission, it was indicated fairly well which was the right option.

Imagine if you choose the option "flank their support squads as soon as I give the order" and discovered that was the worst choice you could make, wouldn't that be really cheap ?

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Nonsense. No one is demanding military micro-managing.[/quote]

But you're demanding something that is hard to implement, and which wouldn't be that rewarding at all, specially when there's plenty of proof from the game that Shepard is already a far more than capable soldier and squad leader.

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

Fortunately, that's not what I'm saying. Try to keep up, dear.[/quote]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...

hey could easily have had a selling quote that fit a leadership/soldier figure. That's just the wasted characterization that takes away from what Shepard is claimed to be [/quote]

I'd rather, if possible, not having to remind you of everything you've said before.

Modifié par feliciano2040, 11 décembre 2011 - 10:53 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

Dave of Canada wrote...

 Congratulations, humanity. You've finally reached your apex, the shining beacon of hope that we'd achieve more has finally been extinguished and we've put aside all chances of improving ourselves.

... atleast that's what the Council would like you to think. The shining beacon of tommorow shall forever light on as long as we've got people like you fighting the Council, strong independent men and women who seek not only to better themselves but their species and the galaxy with their discoveries.

Let galactic history not be a sign of danger, let it be a sign of ignorance. We've seen what the Council has always wanted to do in cases like these, they wish to dimiss them and prevent them from occuring again--neglecting all progress we've made--for the sake of their own egos.

We're the fighters of progress, we're going to march out upon the galaxy and explore every shadow and fight everything that may lurk within. We must achieve the pinnacle which the Council denies us, we must break away and fight for our future.

*salutes*

[BlueMagitek]

And Shepard also had a very professional (assuming you allow him to do so) conversation or two with the Admiral who wishes to inspect the Normandy, regardless of Renegade or Paragon option, which both point out some pretty decent points..

[feliciano2040]

laecraft wrote...

Resorting to ad hominem is a logical fallacy.

Just thought I'd remind you of the very basics of a debate. Either defend your argument, or admit defeat. Don't try to make yourself look good by attempting to learn more of your opponent so that you can resort to personal attacks, you're fooling no one here.

Oh, and age doesn't necessary correlate with maturity. So far, you have proven that.

I'm not trying to "fool" anyone here, I made an unnecessary comment, to which I can perfectly apologize for, that said, I do not need any condescending response from someone who clearly has nothing to contribute to the discussion with.

[Sebby]

BlueMagitek wrote...

And Shepard also had a very professional (assuming you allow him to do so) conversation or two with the Admiral who wishes to inspect the Normandy, regardless of Renegade or Paragon option, which both point out some pretty decent points..

I wish Admiral Mikhailovich  made an appearence in ME2. He could have scolded or praised Shepard for her decision on whether or not to sacrifice Alliance ships to save the council.. The Alliance perspective on that decision was sorely lacking unlike the the alien one.

[Xilizhra]

Seboist wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...

And Shepard also had a very professional (assuming you allow him to do so) conversation or two with the Admiral who wishes to inspect the Normandy, regardless of Renegade or Paragon option, which both point out some pretty decent points..

I wish Admiral Mikhailovich  made an appearence in ME2. He could have scolded or praised Shepard for her decision on whether or not to sacrifice Alliance ships to save the council.. The Alliance perspective on that decision was sorely lacking unlike the the alien one.

They got a seat on the Council, a bunch more power in C-SEC, a much bigger share of the Citadel defense forces, etc. No one's going to be really upset with Shepard. Heck, even Cerberus (or at least Miranda) praises Shepard for saving the Council.

Modifié par Xilizhra, 12 décembre 2011 - 05:09 .

[BlueMagitek]

Eh, at the end of the day, the call was Hackett's, who decided to go with Shepard's call. I'm sure Hackett justified it to the Alliance by now anyway.

Having him back to comment on Cerberus would have been nice though, and he could have hinted at what would have happened with the explanation that Shepard gave for the use of the Normandy.

[feliciano2040]

BlueMagitek wrote...

Eh, at the end of the day, the call was Hackett's, who decided to go with Shepard's call. I'm sure Hackett justified it to the Alliance by now anyway.

Sure, but everyone knows the man (or woman) at the scene was Shepard, the decision came directly from him/her.

[BlueMagitek]

And? Shep gave his opinion, if Hackett had thought it would have ended disastrously otherwise, he would have gone against it.

[feliciano2040]

BlueMagitek wrote...

And? Shep gave his opinion, if Hackett had thought it would have ended disastrously otherwise, he would have gone against it.

But..........he didn't, and it became public knowledge that Shepard was behind that call.

[BlueMagitek]

feliciano2040 wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...

And? Shep gave his opinion, if Hackett had thought it would have ended disastrously otherwise, he would have gone against it.

But..........he didn't, and it became public knowledge that Shepard was behind that call.

Yes, but the responsibility lies with Hackett, not Shepard.  Shepard gave his opinion on the situation and Hackett ran with it. 

[feliciano2040]

BlueMagitek wrote...

Yes, but the responsibility lies with Hackett, not Shepard.  Shepard gave his opinion on the situation and Hackett ran with it.

You make a good point, but at the time Shepard was a spectre, the same rules don't apply because Shepard wasn't in The Alliance's chain of command.

[BlueMagitek]

I don't believe Spectres have authority over the various militaries that comprise Council Space.