6494 réponses à ce sujet

[Lotion Soronarr]

Arkitekt wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Obviously some people aren't content with the writing.

Haters gonna hate. It's your nature.

I'm no hater. But obviously I have to be..cause anyone who doesn't worship ME2 on the altar of perfection and doesn't like every single tiny piece of it, MUST be a dirty, foul hater, right?

We wouldn't want facts getting in the way of your dellusions.
Fanboys gonna be blind to anything contrary to their oppinion.

[Killjoy Cutter]

didymos1120 wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

No. it not. Think of it more of the lines as the way news was reported during 9/11. It was about what the citidel was trying to do about it, not about the event just happening.

It plainly says "Days after" in THE NARRATION. Not the news report: THE NARRATION.  Weak rationalizations don't get you out of that.

What else, besides weak rationalizations and selective reading and grasping at skimmed "facts", do you expect from dreman at this point? 

[Killjoy Cutter]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Straw man. Read Game Informer. They drop 5's all the time. If a game sucks, it sucks. 50% does not equal average.

It does actually. That's called "normal distribution".


Most rating systems have been comepltely skewed and broken by over-inflating scores.
Thankfully ,tehre are stil lsome reviewers and sites that stick to the proper rating system.

"Most rating systems..."

Pay attention to your own words. If most ratings systems no longer utilize a system you are referencing, your "normal distribution" (see what I did there?) no longer applies.

Also, no offense, but you have zero authority commenting on a "proper rating system."

Pick an aggregate if you want, there are several. 50% is not a score assigned to an average video game in this day and age. Again, Homefront got roughly 70% for reviewers and 60% for users. That's an average game. Harry Potter 7.2 got 44 and 50%, respectively. That is below average. You are arguing nonsense.

Take a look at the history of rating games and how the rating changed.
teh system is rather simpel and logical.

On a scale of 0 to 100, 50 is in the middle. It's half. It's the average...

You know what? Frak it...I won't even bother to try to explain this to you. You're not worth the effort - go educate yourself.

And what happens if a reviewer never gives out a review of less than 50% (or the equivalent in whatever nomenclature they're using)? 

Do they mean that all games are at least "average"?  Or does it really mean that an "average"  game gets a score of 75%, and only the worst games get a 50%, for whatever reason? 

A "normal distribution" as you describe it doesn't apply to these situations, where someone can pick any span of numbers deliberately.   The actual average score given out for many reviewers is somewhere higher than 50%, and what score they use to indicate an "average" game isn't 50% for damn certain. 

[Killjoy Cutter]

Phaelducan wrote...
I wish I was better at ignoring dummies, but I'm not.

Same here. 

[Il Divo]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...

Straw man. Read Game Informer. They drop 5's all the time. If a game sucks, it sucks. 50% does not equal average.

It does actually. That's called "normal distribution".


Most rating systems have been comepltely skewed and broken by over-inflating scores.
Thankfully ,tehre are stil lsome reviewers and sites that stick to the proper rating system.

"Most rating systems..."

Pay attention to your own words. If most ratings systems no longer utilize a system you are referencing, your "normal distribution" (see what I did there?) no longer applies.

Also, no offense, but you have zero authority commenting on a "proper rating system."

Pick an aggregate if you want, there are several. 50% is not a score assigned to an average video game in this day and age. Again, Homefront got roughly 70% for reviewers and 60% for users. That's an average game. Harry Potter 7.2 got 44 and 50%, respectively. That is below average. You are arguing nonsense.

Take a look at the history of rating games and how the rating changed.
teh system is rather simpel and logical.

On a scale of 0 to 100, 50 is in the middle. It's half. It's the average...

You know what? Frak it...I won't even bother to try to explain this to you. You're not worth the effort - go educate yourself.

And what happens if a reviewer never gives out a review of less than 50% (or the equivalent in whatever nomenclature they're using)? 

Do they mean that all games are at least "average"?  Or does it really mean that an "average"  game gets a score of 75%, and only the worst games get a 50%, for whatever reason? 

A "normal distribution" as you describe it doesn't apply to these situations, where someone can pick any span of numbers deliberately.   The actual average score given out for many reviewers is somewhere higher than 50%, and what score they use to indicate an "average" game isn't 50% for damn certain. 

Exactly. From what I remember of statistics, the average will not affect the shape of the distribution curve, only where the center is placed. If most reviewers give out scores of 75%, then effectively that is our new average.

[LeandroBraz]

Mister Mida wrote...

LeandroBraz wrote...

No, we don't. I played it just now, we don't see his body going into atmosphere. I research the wikia, nobody says nothing about where the body is found, not even in ME: Redemption. Legion found one piece of ONE Shepard's N7 armor in Normandy SR1, not the armor Shepard was with when he "died". That armor is restaured and given to us when we wake up.

Anyone have evidence instead of speculation?

'Legion found one piece of ONE Shepard's N7 armor in Normandy SR1, not the armor Shepard was with when he "died".'

What?

'That armor is restaured and given to us when we wake up.'

If you're under the impression that the armour you get on Lazarus Station is your restored armour that was found among your body or on the wreckage of the Normandy, you're wrong. I think Cerberus is more than able to acquire a new N7 armour from the Alliance, legal or otherwise.

EDIT: and by your logic, it's not proven either that Shepard was orbiting Alchera and found there. All we got was the camera moving away from Shepard and fading out.

I personally find it more likely and logic that he was found on Alchera. He was moving towards the planet, and who was around after the 'battle' to pick him up? It sure as hell wasn't the Collectors or Shepard's body wouldn't be in the hands of the Shadow Broker.

 Agree, the restauration army thing was only a supposition. The only evidence that he was orbiting the planet is Miranda's vid, that is inconclusive, just as any evidence that Shepard fall in the planet is inconclusive (Legion's N7 armor aren't necessary the one Shepard was using in his death, there's no evidence of that). 

Considering the lot of suppositions necessary to affirm that he was found in the planet in conditions to be bring back (like affirm that his Shield preserve his body), is logical to assume that the body never entered the atmosphere. Sure you can believe otherwise, it's your right and maybe in ME3 they will confirm your believes, but definetely it's not a plot hole. They just don't gave us this information.

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
*fifteenlayersofbull*****

Okay, let me ask you this.

What would all those traps accomplish, besides giving us another obstacle to overcome?

My answer: Waste our time.

It'd just drag the whole thing down if we had to research into every single possibility there might be.

Yes, there could've been something extra, but that's something they had to risk, because in most cases, there's nothing they could do about it even if they knew it was there. Like those supposed fool-proof defenses on the other side of the relay.

[Arkitekt]

LeandroBraz wrote...

No, we don't. I played it just now, we don't see his body going into atmosphere. I research the wikia, nobody says nothing about where the body is found, not even in ME: Redemption. Legion found one piece of ONE Shepard's N7 armor in Normandy SR1, not the armor Shepard was with when he "died". That armor is restaured and given to us when we wake up.

The piece of armor you mention is well integrated in Shepard's suit when we see him falling. If the piece of armor is in the wreckage, how do you propose it got there?

And you claim we don't "see" his body going into atmosphere. Please. He's directly above a gravity well.

[Arkitekt]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


I'm no hater. But obviously I have to be..

There. Full proof anyone with some respect towards rationality should ignore you henceforth.

Fanboys gonna be blind to anything contrary to their oppinion.

If you bothered to look anywhere else but your own bellybutton, you'd probably acknowledge that there are very little "fanboys" here who haven't negative things to say about the games. The topic of the thread is not ME2 criticism, but Smudboy's criticism. Bah, why do I even waste my english with you.

Modifié par Arkitekt, 20 septembre 2011 - 02:00 .

[Arkitekt]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


Take a look at the history of rating games and how the rating changed.
teh system is rather simpel and logical.

On a scale of 0 to 100, 50 is in the middle. It's half. It's the average...

You know what? Frak it...I won't even bother to try to explain this to you. You're not worth the effort - go educate yourself.

Damn, that must be the stupidest thing I've read for a year.

[Killjoy Cutter]

LeandroBraz wrote...

No, we don't. I played it just now, we don't see his body going into atmosphere.

I just played it, and it looks like we see the body falling towards the atmosphere, with no way of recovering orbital velocity.  I've never been certain if what we see at the end, that spray of glow, is atmospheric heating, or sunlight glare.

Legion does mention finding a piece of Shep's armor on the planet.  And the helmet is there.  Take that for what you will. 

[Arkitekt]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

What if someone loves ME2, is still replaying it off and on, but is perfectly honest about the warts and shortcomings? 

If honesty had anything to do with it, we wouldn't be discussing anything, now would we? Simple logic: if people had different opinions due to their honesty or lack of it, why even bother discussing anything?

What is being exposed here is the pettiness, stupidity and outright irrationality of Smudboy's main plot videos and many posts in here, starting with many of yours.

[morrie23]

LeandroBraz wrote...
No, we don't. I played it just now, we don't see his body going into atmosphere.

From ME: Genesis:

Link
Clearly shows Shep entering the atmosphere of Alchera. In might not be clear from the intro of ME2, but it did happen.

Modifié par morrie23, 20 septembre 2011 - 02:20 .

[LeandroBraz]

Arkitekt wrote...

LeandroBraz wrote...

No, we don't. I played it just now, we don't see his body going into atmosphere. I research the wikia, nobody says nothing about where the body is found, not even in ME: Redemption. Legion found one piece of ONE Shepard's N7 armor in Normandy SR1, not the armor Shepard was with when he "died". That armor is restaured and given to us when we wake up.

The piece of armor you mention is well integrated in Shepard's suit when we see him falling. If the piece of armor is in the wreckage, how do you propose it got there?

And you claim we don't "see" his body going into atmosphere. Please. He's directly above a gravity well.

Sometimes I forget that everyone in the internet are physicists..

[Sajuro]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Arkitekt wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Obviously some people aren't content with the writing.

Haters gonna hate. It's your nature.

What if someone loves ME2, is still replaying it off and on, but is perfectly honest about the warts and shortcomings? 

I love ME2 and there are flaws, but instead of going onto forums to yell about them, I riff on ME2 and other games endlessly while enjoying them immensly at the same time.

[didymos1120]

morrie23 wrote...

LeandroBraz wrote...
No, we don't. I played it just now, we don't see his body going into atmosphere.

From ME: Genesis:
*snip image*
Link
Clearly shows Shep entering the atmosphere of Alchera. In might not be clear from the intro of ME2, but it did happen.

No, it's perfectly clear in the intro cutscene as well.  You can see the atmosphere rippling around Shep as he/she falls.  That and the camera stays roughly the same distance from Alchera during that bit, and Shep becomes tinier and tinier, but isn't getting appreciably closer to the edge of the planetary disc in the background.  The only explanation for that is that Shep is falling.

Modifié par didymos1120, 20 septembre 2011 - 02:24 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Il Divo wrote...
And what happens if a reviewer never gives out a review of less than 50% (or the equivalent in whatever nomenclature they're using)? 

Do they mean that all games are at least "average"?  Or does it really mean that an "average"  game gets a score of 75%, and only the worst games get a 50%, for whatever reason? 

A "normal distribution" as you describe it doesn't apply to these situations, where someone can pick any span of numbers deliberately.   The actual average score given out for many reviewers is somewhere higher than 50%, and what score they use to indicate an "average" game isn't 50% for damn certain.

They skewed the system and practicly broke it. the span on eahc side of hte average should be the same. Yet it's not.

Thankfully, there still are reviewers that stick to the sensible rating system.

[morrie23]

didymos1120 wrote...

No, it's perfectly clear in the intro cutscene as well.  You can see the atmosphere rippling around Shep as he/she falls.  That and the camera stays roughly the same distance from Alchera during that bit, and Shep becomes tinier and tinier.  The only explanation for that is that Shep is receding, and that means falling.

I happen to think it is clear from the intro, I just thought I'd provide clearer evidence for LeandroBraz.

[eye basher]

I don't let other people's opinions tell what i will like and what i won't.

[Arkitekt]

Shepard being tinier and tinier and the Planet being the "same size" is easily explainable by the sheer difference of magnitude of size between then, it's not an argument (although I agree he fell).

[Lotion Soronarr]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...
*fifteenlayersofbull*****

Okay, let me ask you this.

What would all those traps accomplish, besides giving us another obstacle to overcome?

My answer: Waste our time.

It'd just drag the whole thing down if we had to research into every single possibility there might be.

Yes, there could've been something extra, but that's something they had to risk, because in most cases, there's nothing they could do about it even if they knew it was there. Like those supposed fool-proof defenses on the other side of the relay.

You know what else is a "waste of time"?
Writers taking time to create a truly brilliant story, instead of just a passable one. but what would that accomplish, when plenty of people are compeltely satisfied with mediocrity?

And you're missing hte point. The point isn't there there should have been traps - it's that they might have been. rushing in blindly - even to save someone - is stupid.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Arkitekt wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...


I'm no hater. But obviously I have to be..

There. Full proof anyone with some respect towards rationality should ignore you henceforth.

Misquoting is proof of something?
Dude, you are the last person who should use the word "rational". You don't know it's meaning.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Arkitekt wrote...
What is being exposed here is MY pettiness, stupidity and outright irrationality, and many posts in here, starting with mine.

fixed:P

[Phaelducan]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Il Divo wrote...
And what happens if a reviewer never gives out a review of less than 50% (or the equivalent in whatever nomenclature they're using)? 

Do they mean that all games are at least "average"?  Or does it really mean that an "average"  game gets a score of 75%, and only the worst games get a 50%, for whatever reason? 

A "normal distribution" as you describe it doesn't apply to these situations, where someone can pick any span of numbers deliberately.   The actual average score given out for many reviewers is somewhere higher than 50%, and what score they use to indicate an "average" game isn't 50% for damn certain.

They skewed the system and practicly broke it. the span on eahc side of hte average should be the same. Yet it's not.

Thankfully, there still are reviewers that stick to the sensible rating system.

More narcissism. So you are wrong, but should be right if more reviewers used a better system? 

Even in a "better system", games aren't being given 0% scores. The vast majority of games fall between 60 and 85... not because reviewers are dumb and have broken the system, but because very few AAA games could be considered the equivalent of academic failure (59% or lower). 

The reason it's relevant is that whenever Mass Effect 2's incredible success is mentioned, it's almost universally ignored or discredited by the detractors. Almost verbatim we hear "reviews don't mean anything, sales don't mean anything, user appreciation doesn't mean anything,"

That is why this whole series of topics is so frustrating. We are called blind fanboys if we like the game, yet we are expected to accept the pointless whining over minutae from a few dozen yahoos over feedback from MILLIONS of people and concrete industry standardized data. When said data is referenced (such as review aggregates), we get "well that doesn't mean anything."

It's absolutely ridiculous.

[Someone With Mass]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

And you're missing hte point. The point isn't there there should have been traps - it's that they might have been. rushing in blindly - even to save someone - is stupid.

Again, even if they did know what was on the other side, there'd be absolutely nothing they could've done about it.