6494 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

iakus wrote...

Alocormin wrote...

Calling Bioware's writers lazy, infantile, or incompetent is not good criticism.  


Perhaps, if you resort to this, you are lazy in your response to the game.

The writers?  Or the writing?

Anyone can have an off day.

It's also possible that the writers wrote mostly the story they wanted, its just that some of us don't enjoy it. I guarantee that no matter what the story or who the writer, there are people out there who don't enjoy it. It doesn't necessarily mean the writer is bad or lazy; it's simply a matter of taste.

However, what I really find amusing is that I seriously doubt the work most of us do could survive similar examination and criticism. Are we all such incredibly hard working, brilliant people that can throw these words around at other people without being total hypocrites? Very doubtful.

Also, none of us are accomplished writers that have ever produced anything, yet because of the wonderful anonymity of the internet we offer professional writers advice like we have some idea of  what we're talking about. While I'm fine with people explaining what they personally enjoy and spitballing about stories they would like to see written, let's stop pretending that we know what we're talking about.

Plot holes are not matter of taste. Plot tropes and tools that use only a tiny percenteage of their potential is not a matter of taste.

Bad writing exists in ME2. You can go past it and enjoy the game DESPITE of it...that doesn't make the meny less of a issue, that doesn't make them dissaper.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

iakus wrote...
I am not saying his arguements are always good.  Even though I agree with most of his conclusions,  I actually also agree that he gets caught up in minutia and at times is overly, let's just say 'blunt" and leave it at that.  

But what I am saying is that while one can say "I don't agree with his assessment" or "His thinking is flawed because..."  It is invalid to say "He's wrong and I didn't even bother to listen to his arguements anyway"

I read his statements while he was here. 

I don't need to listen to more of the same crap to know what he's all about.

All aboard the Bias train! Next stop - Assumption Land and Ignoranceville!

[Humanoid_Typhoon]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

I don't need to counter that...because I say so!

Ah,thanks for the laugh, the irony in that is just too funny.
Cheers.

[Someone With Mass]

Someone should really learn how debates are held, because countering other people's arguments with your own argument is pretty much how it works.

Well, as long as there are actual arguments instead of snide remarks that acts like arguments.

[Whatever42]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Plot holes are not matter of taste. Plot tropes and tools that use only a tiny percenteage of their potential is not a matter of taste.

Bad writing exists in ME2. You can go past it and enjoy the game DESPITE of it...that doesn't make the meny less of a issue, that doesn't make them dissaper.

I agree that plot holes are not a matter of taste. I do believe that people misuse the term plothole. 

Thinking a story is bad is a matter of taste, however. Most people believe the writing in ME2 is very good and that is also a matter of taste. 

But in general, I think the ME2 writers wrote exactly the story that they intended to write. They made certain decisions thoughout story, such making Shepard a blank slate, or setting up a cliff-hanger scene at the beginning of the game, fully realizing that it strained credulity but it was a great scene. That's not bad writing. It was a cool scene and they achieved exactly what they intended to achieve.

On the other hand, we have several amateur writers who say that Bioware should have written a more boring scene that was more realistic. Like video games are supposed to be dull and realistic, like we should be watchingn 2001, which was a great book but wouldn't make a great video game. And then some even accuse the Bioware writers of being lazy or stupid for not writing the scene the way they would have written it. Sorry, that's hubris and I think if some people are going to hurl insults like that then they better make sure that they don't live in glass houses.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Meh.

Bad writing is not a matter of taste - ti simply either is or ins't. You either ignore it or don't.

Bio wrote the story they wanted to write? Maybe, maybe not. No way for you to tell for sure. Still doesn't make it a good story.

And yes. Bad writing. They could have a made a cliff-hanger scene with jsut as muhc impact, but none of hte creduility stretching. It's not really that hard.

Yes, I will consider Bio writers lazy or just not caring enough, if they settle for a "meh, ok" scene isntead of a great scene. Most people will accept mediocrity and be satified with it, without thinking or relising how much better it could have been with just minor changes.

Better writing DOES NOT equal dull/boring writing.

Holding Bio writers up on some pedistal like some gods, worshiping their works is counter-productive and dellusional.

[Notlikeyoucare]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Meh.

Bad writing is not a matter of taste - ti simply either is or ins't. You either ignore it or don't.

Bio wrote the story they wanted to write? Maybe, maybe not. No way for you to tell for sure. Still doesn't make it a good story.

And yes. Bad writing. They could have a made a cliff-hanger scene with jsut as muhc impact, but none of hte creduility stretching. It's not really that hard.

Yes, I will consider Bio writers lazy or just not caring enough, if they settle for a "meh, ok" scene isntead of a great scene. Most people will accept mediocrity and be satified with it, without thinking or relising how much better it could have been with just minor changes.

Better writing DOES NOT equal dull/boring writing.

Holding Bio writers up on some pedistal like some gods, worshiping their works is counter-productive and dellusional.

The whole plot and the resulting retcons all seem like lazyiness on the part of the whole development team, not just the writers. I mean, it seems as if there was no senese of unification on the part of the team, due to the audio and visuals not matching up with what the writing tells us.

The same idea applies when a director and the writers don't sit down together and cohesively construct a scene of a film. .

But thats just my interpretation.

Modifié par Notlikeyoucare, 06 septembre 2011 - 11:32 .

[Xeranx]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Plot holes are not matter of taste. Plot tropes and tools that use only a tiny percenteage of their potential is not a matter of taste.

Bad writing exists in ME2. You can go past it and enjoy the game DESPITE of it...that doesn't make the meny less of a issue, that doesn't make them dissaper.

I agree that plot holes are not a matter of taste. I do believe that people misuse the term plothole. 

Thinking a story is bad is a matter of taste, however. Most people believe the writing in ME2 is very good and that is also a matter of taste. 

But in general, I think the ME2 writers wrote exactly the story that they intended to write. They made certain decisions thoughout story, such making Shepard a blank slate, or setting up a cliff-hanger scene at the beginning of the game, fully realizing that it strained credulity but it was a great scene. That's not bad writing. It was a cool scene and they achieved exactly what they intended to achieve.

On the other hand, we have several amateur writers who say that Bioware should have written a more boring scene that was more realistic. Like video games are supposed to be dull and realistic, like we should be watchingn 2001, which was a great book but wouldn't make a great video game. And then some even accuse the Bioware writers of being lazy or stupid for not writing the scene the way they would have written it. Sorry, that's hubris and I think if some people are going to hurl insults like that then they better make sure that they don't live in glass houses.

Who are the amateur writers that you are talking about?

In the past I've let comments like this go, but I have to ask what credibility do you have to judge who is an amateur writer?  Making claims that people want Bioware to have written "a more boring scene that was more realistic", whether true or not, is a perception based idea until it's realized.  So is that objective or subjective?  

You colored your words to make you appear humble, but have the idea that you can make claims about people being amateur writers.  Is that not hubris?  That comes with the anonymity of the internet, no?  Nevermind that your comment of someone being an amateur (despite the fact that you included yourself) is also colored by your stance which leads one to believe that you feel no one should talk unless they're doing what is being done by those you favor.  What gives you or anyone else any backing to make such statements?  And should I believe them becaues of the "anonymity of the internet" as you pointed out earlier?

Now I'm not saying that you can't discuss, but I am saying that you should stop using a false elevated viewpoint to denote who is an amateur - especially in the negative as you have done.  Plenty of people say things about public officials but they're not in office and will not run for office.  Do they have any credibility to make the claims they make?  I'm sure you have made a few claims about someone.  Do you have the credibility to make the claims you did?  For all of them?

Let's get off this idea that because someone isn't published or public they don't know what they're talking about.  I'm a fan of John Mayer, but there are at least 100 people who play better than him.  There are at least 100 people who sing better than he does.  There are at least 100 people who perform better than he does.  None of them are in the public eye.  Some of them tried to gain what he has but were unable to attain it.  Some are quite comfortable doing the jobs they do away from the spotlight.  Giving the idea that you're only credible if you're known is a fallacy because you don't know what anyone else knows unless they tell you or show you what they know.  Taking an elevated viewpoint as you have done is also a fallacy.

Discuss if you want, but don't make claims you can't back up.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

iakus wrote...
I am not saying his arguements are always good.  Even though I agree with most of his conclusions,  I actually also agree that he gets caught up in minutia and at times is overly, let's just say 'blunt" and leave it at that.  

But what I am saying is that while one can say "I don't agree with his assessment" or "His thinking is flawed because..."  It is invalid to say "He's wrong and I didn't even bother to listen to his arguements anyway"

I read his statements while he was here. 

I don't need to listen to more of the same crap to know what he's all about.

All aboard the Bias train! Next stop - Assumption Land and Ignoranceville!

What part do you not understand about someone getting tired of watching Smuggy be a pompous assclown towards everyone around him, while hammering his halfbaked opinions and hollow "analysis" as if they were fact, while ignoring anything inconvenient to his "point"? 

I've read and listened to Smuggy's crap enough to know that it's not worth bothering with any more of it.   After all these years, I know more than enough about what Dennis Kucinich and Glenn Beck are about that I don't need to waste my time listening to their crap every day, either.  Smuggy is only "discussing" Mass Effect, so what makes you think I'm going to waste my time on yet more of the same tired BS from him? 

Smuggy and his ilk say something like "This was a flaw in Mass Effect 2's story, because of the following..." 

Someone says "Well, actually, those issues were addressed here, here, here, and here in the game". 

Smuggy and his ilk say "Wow, what a drooling moronic fanboy!" and completely ignore whatever was pointed out that conflicted with the original criticism.

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 06 septembre 2011 - 03:26 .

[Someone With Mass]

I enjoyed squee's videos more because they had moments where it was just messing around while still keeping up with the facts and arguments.

Entertainment tend to do better.

[Notlikeyoucare]

As boring as Smudboy is, his Fallout: New Virmire joke was hilarious.

[Fixers0]

Someone With Mass wrote...
I enjoyed squee's videos more because they had moments where it was just messing around while still keeping up with the facts and arguments.

What facts are you reffering too?

Someone With Mass wrote...
Entertainment tend to do better.

But that doesn't change the validity of one's arguments.

Modifié par Fixers0, 06 septembre 2011 - 03:58 .

[Notlikeyoucare]

Fixers0 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...
I enjoyed squee's videos more because they had moments where it was just messing around while still keeping up with the facts and arguments.

What facts are you reffering too?

Someone With Mass wrote...
Entertainment tend to do better.

But that doesn't change the validity of one's arguments.

I assume he just means in general.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

iakus wrote...
I am not saying his arguements are always good.  Even though I agree with most of his conclusions,  I actually also agree that he gets caught up in minutia and at times is overly, let's just say 'blunt" and leave it at that.  

But what I am saying is that while one can say "I don't agree with his assessment" or "His thinking is flawed because..."  It is invalid to say "He's wrong and I didn't even bother to listen to his arguements anyway"

I read his statements while he was here. 

I don't need to listen to more of the same crap to know what he's all about.

All aboard the Bias train! Next stop - Assumption Land and Ignoranceville!

What part do you not understand about someone getting tired of watching Smuggy be a pompous assclown towards everyone around him, while hammering his halfbaked opinions and hollow "analysis" as if they were fact, while ignoring anything inconvenient to his "point"? 

I've read and listened to Smuggy's crap enough to know that it's not worth bothering with any more of it.   After all these years, I know more than enough about what Dennis Kucinich and Glenn Beck are about that I don't need to waste my time listening to their crap every day, either.  Smuggy is only "discussing" Mass Effect, so what makes you think I'm going to waste my time on yet more of the same tired BS from him? 

Smuggy and his ilk say something like "This was a flaw in Mass Effect 2's story, because of the following..." 

Someone says "Well, actually, those issues were addressed here, here, here, and here in the game". 

Smuggy and his ilk say "Wow, what a drooling moronic fanboy!" and completely ignore whatever was pointed out that conflicted with the original criticism.

You yourself claim you didn't "listen to his crapm because it's the same old"
Then you attack him based on the things he said in the video..the very video that you didn't pay attention to.

Ignorance - you don't know what is in the video, you ASSUME. You talk not from facts, but your own immagination.
You don't like the man, so you process everything he sez in a negative light.

His main points were never adressed. His main arguments never properly coutnered.
His criticism is CORRECT and BACKED UP BY FACT.

You on the other hand, are a poster boy for everything that's wrong with internet.

[100k]

Don't waste your breath, Lotion. I found that you just can't argue with those people. For them, it ultimately comes down to "I don't like him", instead of "this is why his points are wrong".

Modifié par 100k, 06 septembre 2011 - 04:07 .

[Anacronian Stryx]

I tend to this that Biowares writing has become "lazy" because they have realised they don't have to put mutch effort into it.

After all the fanboys will suck on Biowares Banana no matter what they put out and the "Not so fanboish" will just think "Oh it's just a computer game" or "It's just sci-fi it doesn't need cohesive plot or narrative" and the rest are just fine with "Oh shiny ..oh explosions this game rocks!!".

Who wants to labor hard to actually make something good when mediocrity is perfectly acceptable?

[Someone With Mass]

Fixers0 wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...
I enjoyed squee's videos more because they had moments where it was just messing around while still keeping up with the facts and arguments.

What facts are you reffering too?

Someone With Mass wrote...
Entertainment tend to do better.

But that doesn't change the validity of one's arguments.

No, but it sure makes it easier to watch the videos without feeling like it's an hour and a half long rant.

[Someone With Mass]

100k wrote...

Don't waste your breath, Lotion. I found that you just can't argue with those people. For them, it ultimately comes down to "I don't like him", instead of "this is why his points are wrong".

Considering that he's covering the whole game and then some, it'd be pretty time consuming to write an essay about what's wrong with his arguments. I agree with squee that it's easier to make a video instead. Which I won't do.

[Xeranx]

Anacronian Stryx wrote...

I tend to this that Biowares writing has become "lazy" because they have realised they don't have to put mutch effort into it.

After all the fanboys will suck on Biowares Banana no matter what they put out and the "Not so fanboish" will just think "Oh it's just a computer game" or "It's just sci-fi it doesn't need cohesive plot or narrative" and the rest are just fine with "Oh shiny ..oh explosions this game rocks!!".

Who wants to labor hard to actually make something good when mediocrity is perfectly acceptable?

And that's why we have reality television. 

[Notlikeyoucare]

Someone With Mass wrote...

100k wrote...

Don't waste your breath, Lotion. I found that you just can't argue with those people. For them, it ultimately comes down to "I don't like him", instead of "this is why his points are wrong".

Considering that he's covering the whole game and then some, it'd be pretty time consuming to write an essay about what's wrong with his arguments. I agree with squee that it's easier to make a video instead. Which I won't do.

Then don't post. Its not that hard.

[111987]

Anacronian Stryx wrote...

I tend to this that Biowares writing has become "lazy" because they have realised they don't have to put mutch effort into it.

After all the fanboys will suck on Biowares Banana no matter what they put out and the "Not so fanboish" will just think "Oh it's just a computer game" or "It's just sci-fi it doesn't need cohesive plot or narrative" and the rest are just fine with "Oh shiny ..oh explosions this game rocks!!".

Who wants to labor hard to actually make something good when mediocrity is perfectly acceptable?

Yeah, Bioware is so lazy...all those thousands of lines od dialogue proves it!

Come on, seriously? To call the writers lazy is just ridiculous, there is so much detail written into the game and the Codex. Sure, some parts and sections of writing weren't great or up to everyone's very high standards, but lazy?

Maybe you just don't realize how much work they put into this game...

[dreman9999]

You guy are still argueing. And of all thing about plotholes still. Did we are prover their are no ploholes in ME2 outside of Jacobs loyalty quest?

[Notlikeyoucare]

dreman9999 wrote...

You guy are still argueing. And of all thing about plotholes still. Did we are prover their are no ploholes in ME2 outside of Jacobs loyalty quest?

No you haven't and you never will. Because plotholes do infact exist.

[Fixers0]

Someone With Mass wrote...

No, but it sure makes it easier to watch the videos without feeling like it's an hour and a half long rant.

Yeah, i know what you're talking about, it just came unbearable watching squee stumbling to making up arguments and trying to get smudboy on every minor detail of his analysis.  

[111987]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

You guy are still argueing. And of all thing about plotholes still. Did we are prover their are no ploholes in ME2 outside of Jacobs loyalty quest?

No you haven't and you never will. Because plotholes do infact exist.

At least you're still not going on about how Reapers having organic components is a damn retcon...

Or the shields can't deflect debris...

Or sending a probe through the Omega 4 would be a pointless excercise in futility, and not enhance the plot or drama in any meaningful way...