6494 réponses à ce sujet

[Azbeszt]

Wow, this thread is like .

[111987]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...
@Lotion You are missing everything again. I don't know why I bother, but here it goes again. Everything is NOT subjective, as I previously stated. Saying that Taco Bell is bad food is not the same thing as saying human sacrifice is bad... just because both "aren't my thing." One is an example of a subset of fast food, the other is a universally agreed upon no-no. Taste does apply in some situations, but not all of them (again, previously stated).

In the case of Mass Effect 2 and the oft-discussed plot "problems" much of what is listed is PURELY subjective in it's criticism. The issues with the VS, the suicide mission, the loyalty missions, etc etc are not universally disliked, which is about as compelling an argument as can be made that the problems with the plot are subjective. I really can't make that any more clear, so if you are still adamant that the writing sucks as a hard fact, it's definitely time to move on (arguable, that time came a couple hundred pages ago).

Nope.
I'm sorry, but people having different oppinions on X doesn't mean that neither oppinion is correct.

If 500 million people thought the moon was made of cheese, that doesn't make the composition of the moon subjective at all. Regardless of what they think.

Yes, the writing sucks in many places. Hard fact.
ME2's side-plots are nicely written (heck, they could get a game of their own), but the main plot is one of hte worst (if not the worst) BioWare ever did.

Except a scientist can go to the moon and get a sample that will prove it is not cheese. Everyone can look at it, test it, and tell it is not cheese. There is no point of view. For the same thing to be true for ME2, you would have to be able to send a probe through the Relay and have it do something useful. You would have to be able to make TIM spend his resources on something else and have it get better results. Then, you could point to these results and say, "See? This is why that was a stupid idea. this is why the moon is not cheese" 

You are trying to say that writing that you think does not make sense is universal. It's not. Your only arguments are that "this is not logical" or, "it was stupid for the character not to do this.", or "the story needed to explain this better because it does not make sense to me." 

All of these are subjective opinions. All it takes is for one person to say, "I think this was logical" or, "It made sense for the character not to do this" or, "The story did not need to explain it more, because I understood it perfectly."

We are not saying that Plot holes do not equal bad. We are arguing what we think is or is not a plot hole. That is pure opinion. You may think it was stupid for Shepard to not send probes through the Omega 4 relay. I disagree, and thought it made sense.  You can say that is stupid or that I don't know what I'm talking about, but you cannot say that your opinion that he should have is universally considered to be correct. Until you can prove that sending probes through or resurrecting Shepard was not a good idea, with hard facts, it will always be your opinion and nothing more. 

But you'd be wrong. It isn't just my opinion that it is stupid, but it works against the story. A suicide misson does not = running into the unknown blind because we were too stupid to do further recon. Because these things are unaddressed as to why they did not occur, this makes the plot contrived, which is bad storytelling. As for Shepard, resurrecting him is stupid due to the abundance of simpiler, more practical, and effective options, which the story did not adress. If we were told why resurrecting Shepard was good, and sending probes was not or unneeded, this would solve the problem. Until that happens, its just ****ty writing.

Oh my God, drop the probe thing. If it makes you feel better, just assume the Illusive Man sent probes through and they didn't work. He said he was investing all resources into getting through the Omega 4 Relay. Does Bioware seriously need to hold your hand that much and list every single thing he did?

Please, get over yourself and this ridiculous idea that your opinions are better than anyone else's.

[SpiffySquee]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...
@Lotion You are missing everything again. I don't know why I bother, but here it goes again. Everything is NOT subjective, as I previously stated. Saying that Taco Bell is bad food is not the same thing as saying human sacrifice is bad... just because both "aren't my thing." One is an example of a subset of fast food, the other is a universally agreed upon no-no. Taste does apply in some situations, but not all of them (again, previously stated).

In the case of Mass Effect 2 and the oft-discussed plot "problems" much of what is listed is PURELY subjective in it's criticism. The issues with the VS, the suicide mission, the loyalty missions, etc etc are not universally disliked, which is about as compelling an argument as can be made that the problems with the plot are subjective. I really can't make that any more clear, so if you are still adamant that the writing sucks as a hard fact, it's definitely time to move on (arguable, that time came a couple hundred pages ago).

Nope.
I'm sorry, but people having different oppinions on X doesn't mean that neither oppinion is correct.

If 500 million people thought the moon was made of cheese, that doesn't make the composition of the moon subjective at all. Regardless of what they think.

Yes, the writing sucks in many places. Hard fact.
ME2's side-plots are nicely written (heck, they could get a game of their own), but the main plot is one of hte worst (if not the worst) BioWare ever did.

Except a scientist can go to the moon and get a sample that will prove it is not cheese. Everyone can look at it, test it, and tell it is not cheese. There is no point of view. For the same thing to be true for ME2, you would have to be able to send a probe through the Relay and have it do something useful. You would have to be able to make TIM spend his resources on something else and have it get better results. Then, you could point to these results and say, "See? This is why that was a stupid idea. this is why the moon is not cheese" 

You are trying to say that writing that you think does not make sense is universal. It's not. Your only arguments are that "this is not logical" or, "it was stupid for the character not to do this.", or "the story needed to explain this better because it does not make sense to me." 

All of these are subjective opinions. All it takes is for one person to say, "I think this was logical" or, "It made sense for the character not to do this" or, "The story did not need to explain it more, because I understood it perfectly."

We are not saying that Plot holes do not equal bad. We are arguing what we think is or is not a plot hole. That is pure opinion. You may think it was stupid for Shepard to not send probes through the Omega 4 relay. I disagree, and thought it made sense.  You can say that is stupid or that I don't know what I'm talking about, but you cannot say that your opinion that he should have is universally considered to be correct. Until you can prove that sending probes through or resurrecting Shepard was not a good idea, with hard facts, it will always be your opinion and nothing more. 

But you'd be wrong. It isn't just my opinion that it is stupid, but it works against the story. A suicide misson does not = running into the unknown blind because we were too stupid to do further recon. Because these things are unaddressed as to why they did not occur, this makes the plot contrived, which is bad storytelling. As for Shepard, resurrecting him is stupid due to the abundance of simpiler, more practical, and effective options, which the story did not adress. If we were told why resurrecting Shepard was good, and sending probes was not or unneeded, this would solve the problem. Until that happens, its just ****ty writing.

And again, you were told why they did or did not happen, you just did not like the explanation. The game clearly states that nothing has ever gone through and come back. Even the book stated at one point they would send probes through other relays, but it did not work and in the end, you just had to jump into the unknown.  Nothing in the game suggests that the IFF was able to be installed in a probe, or that it would make any difference. You do not feel this is a good enough explanation. that is fine, but that is merely your opinion.

TIM explained exactly why Shep was revived. I understand, and felt that it was believable that TIM would think that way. That is merely my opinion, but the opposite can be said for you. the explanations are there. The fact that you did not like them or think they were good enough, is your opinion, not a universal truth. 

Modifié par SpiffySquee, 23 septembre 2011 - 03:10 .

[Sgt Stryker]

Regarding the probe thing: Is it really a game-breaker if it can be solved by one or two extra lines of dialogue?

e.g. "I had hundreds of probes sent through, but none came back."
or "I had hundreds of probes sent through, but only one badly-damaged probe came back with information we can use. The Collector homeworld is not a planet at all, but a large installation located within the galactic core. You will need to put together a team of experts for an infiltration mission etc. etc."

[Killjoy Cutter]

The only time we get a hint of a probe returning anything at all is in the goofy post-victory LotSB nonsense, most of which is better off being discounted.

[Arkitekt]

Yeah, Sgt, and dontcha know that's the hallmark of a terribad plot /sarc

OTOH, it's true that Jack has no motivation to be in a Cerberus ship preparing itself for a suicidal mission. All we are given, as far as I can tell is something to the order of "she had nothing else to do". I mean, ffs lol.

[Notlikeyoucare]

111987 wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Phaelducan wrote...
@Lotion You are missing everything again. I don't know why I bother, but here it goes again. Everything is NOT subjective, as I previously stated. Saying that Taco Bell is bad food is not the same thing as saying human sacrifice is bad... just because both "aren't my thing." One is an example of a subset of fast food, the other is a universally agreed upon no-no. Taste does apply in some situations, but not all of them (again, previously stated).

In the case of Mass Effect 2 and the oft-discussed plot "problems" much of what is listed is PURELY subjective in it's criticism. The issues with the VS, the suicide mission, the loyalty missions, etc etc are not universally disliked, which is about as compelling an argument as can be made that the problems with the plot are subjective. I really can't make that any more clear, so if you are still adamant that the writing sucks as a hard fact, it's definitely time to move on (arguable, that time came a couple hundred pages ago).

Nope.
I'm sorry, but people having different oppinions on X doesn't mean that neither oppinion is correct.

If 500 million people thought the moon was made of cheese, that doesn't make the composition of the moon subjective at all. Regardless of what they think.

Yes, the writing sucks in many places. Hard fact.
ME2's side-plots are nicely written (heck, they could get a game of their own), but the main plot is one of hte worst (if not the worst) BioWare ever did.

Except a scientist can go to the moon and get a sample that will prove it is not cheese. Everyone can look at it, test it, and tell it is not cheese. There is no point of view. For the same thing to be true for ME2, you would have to be able to send a probe through the Relay and have it do something useful. You would have to be able to make TIM spend his resources on something else and have it get better results. Then, you could point to these results and say, "See? This is why that was a stupid idea. this is why the moon is not cheese" 

You are trying to say that writing that you think does not make sense is universal. It's not. Your only arguments are that "this is not logical" or, "it was stupid for the character not to do this.", or "the story needed to explain this better because it does not make sense to me." 

All of these are subjective opinions. All it takes is for one person to say, "I think this was logical" or, "It made sense for the character not to do this" or, "The story did not need to explain it more, because I understood it perfectly."

We are not saying that Plot holes do not equal bad. We are arguing what we think is or is not a plot hole. That is pure opinion. You may think it was stupid for Shepard to not send probes through the Omega 4 relay. I disagree, and thought it made sense.  You can say that is stupid or that I don't know what I'm talking about, but you cannot say that your opinion that he should have is universally considered to be correct. Until you can prove that sending probes through or resurrecting Shepard was not a good idea, with hard facts, it will always be your opinion and nothing more. 

But you'd be wrong. It isn't just my opinion that it is stupid, but it works against the story. A suicide misson does not = running into the unknown blind because we were too stupid to do further recon. Because these things are unaddressed as to why they did not occur, this makes the plot contrived, which is bad storytelling. As for Shepard, resurrecting him is stupid due to the abundance of simpiler, more practical, and effective options, which the story did not adress. If we were told why resurrecting Shepard was good, and sending probes was not or unneeded, this would solve the problem. Until that happens, its just ****ty writing.

Oh my God, drop the probe thing. If it makes you feel better, just assume the Illusive Man sent probes through and they didn't work. He said he was investing all resources into getting through the Omega 4 Relay. Does Bioware seriously need to hold your hand that much and list every single thing he did?

Please, get over yourself and this ridiculous idea that your opinions are better than anyone else's.

It was on the topic of discussion, I will talk about it if I wish, deal with it. I don't think my opinions are better than anyone else's. I personally find Mass Effect 2 boring, but thats just how I feel: my opinion. Bad writing isn't my opinion because it can be clearly be objectively examined to explaine how the writing is poor and is antithetical to storytelling.

See, I could accept the probe thing if it was never established that SB's probes came back (yes, yes I know they were broken,but then there's the big one. In the Renegade ending TIM's ships are seen flying towards the CB. The fact that they even tried that makes sending probes a possible option. The fact that we begin to prepare for something without knowing what we're fighting against, worse, that it works out in the end makes the story 100% contrived and un-natural.

[Notlikeyoucare]

Also, reagrding the probes. I don't think sending probes specifically is the problem. We just needed an avenue of information gathering that told us what we were up against so we could properly prepare for it. Instead of preparing before we understand the problem.

[Il Divo]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Also, reagrding the probes. I don't think sending probes specifically is the problem. We just needed an avenue of information gathering that told us what we were up against so we could properly prepare for it. Instead of preparing before we understand the problem.

As per the game, the problem is that we have an example of circular reasoning.

We need information to prepare for the problem. But we don't have any information, so we don't know what to prepare for, leaving us with very few "correct" courses of action.

[Arkitekt]

What you can say is that the writing has errors. To actually go out on a limb and declare it bad, you'd need more than nitpicking tests of coherence and non-contradiction. You'd actually need a quantized criteria. And of course this is ludicrous, but so is the notion that ME2 has a "bad plot". Not a bad plot, just a slightly messed up one, probably due to the gargantuan task that it is to get hold of all the variables and keep a sane mind at the same time.

[Someone With Mass]

Sgt Stryker wrote...

Regarding the probe thing: Is it really a game-breaker if it can be solved by one or two extra lines of dialogue?

e.g. "I had hundreds of probes sent through, but none came back."
or "I had hundreds of probes sent through, but only one badly-damaged probe came back with information we can use. The Collector homeworld is not a planet at all, but a large installation located within the galactic core. You will need to put together a team of experts for an infiltration mission etc. etc."

Is it really a game-breaker if TIM said that he devoted more resources to find a way, but didn't specify what kind of resources?

In my opinion...no, not really.

[Notlikeyoucare]

Il Divo wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Also, reagrding the probes. I don't think sending probes specifically is the problem. We just needed an avenue of information gathering that told us what we were up against so we could properly prepare for it. Instead of preparing before we understand the problem.

As per the game, the problem is that we have an example of circular reasoning.

We need information to prepare for the problem. But we don't have any information, so we don't know what to prepare for, leaving us with very few "correct" courses of action.

Still, the least of which is charging in blind, or even recruiting a team of badasses for what could be a fleet on the other side. Much less, making THEM the first ones through with an IFF and not say, a Cerberus scout team.

[Sgt Stryker]

But shouldn't a responsible commander at least be given the option to ask TIM to specify? I mean, you're given the opportunity to probe him for information regarding your former crew. Why not probe him about what kind of moves he's already taken against the Collectors? More investigate options are generally a good thing. In fact, I think any feature that results in more time spent playing Mass Effect (pointless time-sink minigames and clunky inventories are the exceptions) is a good investment.

A good way to do this would have been include another Investigate option, and have several conversation choices like:
"Have you tried sending unmanned probes through the relay?"
"Have you considered placing proximity mines or turrets around the relay?"
"What about stationing a fleet?"

Of course, TIM can shoot down all of these ideas as either impractical, or he can say they tried that and failed.

[Fixers0]

 Using probes is perhaps the easist thing a foremost thing you want to do when you want to gather information on the enemy's forces, locations, etc in preparation for an offensive mission, i would call it at the smaller plot hole that fit's into the bigger, that is that we perform very little effort to make this mission a suicide mission, even though it's the most logical alternative to the plot, Whatever twelve characters and some ship upgrades later it comes  together anyway.

But that let's take a look from Shepard's perspective, he absolutly has no idea on what he is going to face, he send of by TIM to gather some characters based on a dossier that's smaller then the civil rights in North korea. He get's no information whatever unless TIM decides to give to progress the plot a little.  But if the plot would have been a little bit smarter  that has the player actually involve doing prepatory work, then sending some probes, researching and upgrading them would have been a perfectly fine sub-plot combine that with some another sub-plots like raiding weapon depots, upgrading the normandy and training the characters the game would have been a much more memorable experiance and be much more involving the player and their actions.

[Arkitekt]

Azbeszt wrote...

Wow, this thread is like .

More like 

[SpiffySquee]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

See, I could accept the probe thing if it was never established that SB's probes came back (yes, yes I know they were broken,but then there's the big one. In the Renegade ending TIM's ships are seen flying towards the CB. The fact that they even tried that makes sending probes a possible option. The fact that we begin to prepare for something without knowing what we're fighting against, worse, that it works out in the end makes the story 100% contrived and un-natural.

I am honestly shocked that some people cannot even tell the difference between fact and opinion. 
Shep did not send probes through the Omega 4 relay. That is a fact. From any perspective, or point of view, this remains true.
 I think he should have, or the story should have done a better job explaining why he didn't. That is an opinion. It is not universally true. Different people look at it different ways. Some people do not think he should have. Some people felt the story explained it well enough. Facts have to be true from any perspective, not just yours. 

[Arkitekt]

People love to talk objectively but I'm afraid most of us haven't a clue of what that even means.

[SpiffySquee]

Fixers0 wrote...

 Using probes is perhaps the easist thing a foremost thing you want to do when you want to gather information on the enemy's forces, locations, etc in preparation for an offensive mission, i would call it at the smaller plot hole that fit's into the bigger, that is that we perform very little effort to make this mission a suicide mission, even though it's the most logical alternative to the plot, Whatever twelve characters and some ship upgrades later it comes  together anyway.

But that let's take a look from Shepard's perspective, he absolutly has no idea on what he is going to face, he send of by TIM to gather some characters based on a dossier that's smaller then the civil rights in North korea. He get's no information whatever unless TIM decides to give to progress the plot a little.  But if the plot would have been a little bit smarter  that has the player actually involve doing prepatory work, then sending some probes, researching and upgrading them would have been a perfectly fine sub-plot combine that with some another sub-plots like raiding weapon depots, upgrading the normandy and training the characters the game would have been a much more memorable experiance and be much more involving the player and their actions.

And what if the player does not like doing preparatory work? What if he feels this would have slowed the plot down and had him doing things a lab coat should do while he could be out putting together a team? Then you idea of the plot would have been bad writing. Which is , again, why this is all opinion. 

[Il Divo]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

Also, reagrding the probes. I don't think sending probes specifically is the problem. We just needed an avenue of information gathering that told us what we were up against so we could properly prepare for it. Instead of preparing before we understand the problem.

As per the game, the problem is that we have an example of circular reasoning.

We need information to prepare for the problem. But we don't have any information, so we don't know what to prepare for, leaving us with very few "correct" courses of action.

Still, the least of which is charging in blind, or even recruiting a team of badasses for what could be a fleet on the other side. Much less, making THEM the first ones through with an IFF and not say, a Cerberus scout team.

I would agree that sending the Normandy through the relay after acquiring the IFF was stupid. But the point is: what is the correct response? The narrative establishes that nothing going through the relay is likely to come back. If we're positing that information is necessary before preparation and we have no method of acquiring information, then can we not assume that there would be no action at any point?

Modifié par Il Divo, 23 septembre 2011 - 04:09 .

[Notlikeyoucare]

SpiffySquee wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...

See, I could accept the probe thing if it was never established that SB's probes came back (yes, yes I know they were broken,but then there's the big one. In the Renegade ending TIM's ships are seen flying towards the CB. The fact that they even tried that makes sending probes a possible option. The fact that we begin to prepare for something without knowing what we're fighting against, worse, that it works out in the end makes the story 100% contrived and un-natural.

I am honestly shocked that some people cannot even tell the difference between fact and opinion. 
Shep did not send probes through the Omega 4 relay. That is a fact. From any perspective, or point of view, this remains true.
 I think he should have, or the story should have done a better job explaining why he didn't. That is an opinion. It is not universally true. Different people look at it different ways. Some people do not think he should have. Some people felt the story explained it well enough. Facts have to be true from any perspective, not just yours. 

I don't really care what he did or didn't do. Its an action or inaction that affects the plot as a whole and undermines the story and made sequence of events occur out of sheer dumb luck. It is a problem with the overarching plot that is consistent from beggining to end. Theres nothing organic about it, the only point it serves is getting the story to where it needs to be, consistency be damned. Contrivances to the plot aren't always as impactful like say in Slumdog Millionare. But when put in context with this universe, the stakes, and consequences, it becomes a fatal blow  to the quality of the story.

[Fixers0]

SpiffySquee wrote...
And what if the player does not like doing preparatory work?

Because from whatever i can make up from the plot it's the goal to prepare for a suicde mission.

By you're logic i can also say.

"What if the player don't want a crazy, swaring ***** onboard" or "What if the player doesn't want to play therapist for the majority of the game.

SpiffySquee wrote...
What if he feels this would have slowed the plot down and had him doing things a lab coat should do while he could be out putting together a team?

Exact same argument, it's the goal to make this suicide mission a succes, we need to carfully prepare, not t rush the whole "preparation" job, but take you're sweet time in dealing with personal character issues that have nothing to do with the plot.

And again you're logic can be used against you: "what if people don't want to deal with all these characters that for the most part just sit on the ship"

SpiffySquee wrote...
Then you idea of the plot would have been bad writing.

It's a small plothole part of the larger problem, but mainly comes down on sloppy storytelling and poorly desgined concepts.

SpiffySquee wrote...
Which is , again, why this is all opinion.

uhhmm, Why?

If the game tells me to prepare for a suicde mission of unknown proportions, but between the reveal and the actual mission gives us twelve badasses to deal it, with occasianly 20 minute long mission of shooting to progress the plot, then i would't call it an opinion.

[Lukertin]

Notlikeyoucare wrote...
Still, the least of which is charging in blind, or even recruiting a team of badasses for what could be a fleet on the other side. Much less, making THEM the first ones through with an IFF and not say, a Cerberus scout team.

Like sending a scout team through and broadcasting to the Collectors "Sup bros, I'm in your IFF using your mass relays" is an intelligent course of action. You already know Collector sensors are advanced enough to disregard the Normandy's stealth systems, so I'm curious as to WHY you think sending in a scout ship and letting the collectors know their IFF no longer works at keeping non-collector ships from using the Omega relay is a smart thing to do.

There is a 500% chance the Collectors will know a scout ship is there. You can bet they will instantly begin preparations for an attack of any form. Any subsequent ship that uses the relay will be blasted to cosmic dust within five seconds of appearing on the other side.

Modifié par Lukertin, 23 septembre 2011 - 04:13 .

[didymos1120]

Fixers0 wrote...

And again you're logic can be used against you: "what if people don't want to deal with all these characters that for the most part just sit on the ship"

Then, um, don't?  I don't know if you noticed or not, but that is an option.

[Notlikeyoucare]

Lukertin wrote...

Notlikeyoucare wrote...
Still, the least of which is charging in blind, or even recruiting a team of badasses for what could be a fleet on the other side. Much less, making THEM the first ones through with an IFF and not say, a Cerberus scout team.

Like sending a scout team through and broadcasting to the Collectors "Sup bros, I'm in your IFF using your mass relays" is an intelligent course of action. You already know Collector sensors are advanced enough to disregard the Normandy's stealth systems, so I'm curious as to WHY you think sending in a scout ship and letting the collectors know their IFF no longer works at keeping non-collector ships from using the Omega relay is a smart thing to do.

There is a 500% chance the Collectors will know a scout ship is there. You can bet they will instantly begin preparations for an attack of any form. Any subsequent ship that uses the relay will be blasted to cosmic dust within five seconds of appearing on the other side.

But it doesn't matter. With the way the story plays out, the element of suprise never comes into play. Immediately upon entering the debris field, the Occuli attack us, the Collectors attack us. Besides, they ALREADY know we have an IFF because thats what they used to track us. They should have expected us and been prepared for something with an IFF to come through. At least if we send a scout ship through we can observe any damage it might of taken to gain an idea of what defenses might be on the other side and how to combat them.

[Arkitekt]

Fixers0 wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...
And what if the player does not like doing preparatory work?

Because from whatever i can make up from the plot it's the goal to prepare for a suicde mission.

By you're logic i can also say.

"What if the player don't want a crazy, swaring ***** onboard" or "What if the player doesn't want to play therapist for the majority of the game.

He has all of those choices. Some have consequences. Such is the sign of a good game ;D.

If the game tells me to prepare for a suicde mission of unknown proportions, but between the reveal and the actual mission gives us twelve badasses to deal it, with occasianly 20 minute long mission of shooting to progress the plot, then i would't call it an opinion.

Of course you should, since all the "objective" reasoning you could apply against it is your own subjective prejudices against the format. You are convinced that the main plot should be given more attention than the rest of the plots, but again, there is no single "objective" reason for this, apart from some imagined arbitrary rules that someone took out of their ass.