6494 réponses à ce sujet

[Rockworm503]

[quote]Lotion Soronnar wrote...

[quote]Rockworm503 wrote...
My post brings up one point and all you can do is fixate on me mentioning the music.
Put ANY music there and my point would be exactly the same.[/quote]

Then what was the point of brining up the music at all, if oyu would hate ANY music he choose?
[/quote]
It was to make a point.  OK lets not bring up music at all because that is such a touchy subject.  Apperantly I look stupid because I have a real problem with the way Smudboy presents himself.  I was responding with a what if.  If Smudboy just had 9 minutes of Beavis and Butthead laughing and then made a good point at the end is he still so great?  Oh if I complaing about anything other than that one point at the end of his 9 minutes of laughing I'm an idiot apperanlty.

[quote]
How is it that Smudboys fans are the harshest people who are so happy to attack anyone who has any problem with the guy?  What he can dish it out but he can't take it?[/quote]

He dishes out valid criticims supported by argumetns. You dish out...nothing. Fo the last several thread you didn't do anything but go "I hate smudboy. He's arogant. I hate his voice. His music selection sucks!"
[/quote]
Last I checked the way someone talks and comes off as was a valid critism.  No I bring nothing because I can't touch his brilliant analysing.  Whatever...  He decides what is right and what is wrong.  He flat out insults Squee a couple times... He clearly has contempt for anyone who doesn't agree with him.  Proof is right there people getting ignores from his channel for even bringing them up.

[quote]
Hes not even here guys you don't have to go on like this.
[/quote]

Neither do you.
Mind you, I don't care about smudboy.. I just have an alergic reaction to people that react like you do.

[/quote]

Then you should be breaking up in hives because you just did.

[The Silent]

I don't agree with many of his points or ideas, and I didn't like the music he used, but Smudboy is completely right to say the main plot of ME2 is a mess. It looks okay superficially, but it falls apart when you spend any time analysing it.

Many of the plot elements of ME2 could be reused in a more coherent way... it is mostly fixable, but it was executed badly.

I'm saying this as someone who likes the game and generally finds the writing to be of high quality, for the most part.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Rockworm503 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Rockworm503 wrote...
My post brings up one point and all you can do is fixate on me mentioning the music.
Put ANY music there and my point would be exactly the same.

Then what was the point of brining up the music at all, if oyu would hate ANY music he choose?

It was to make a point.  OK lets not bring up music at all because that is such a touchy subject.  Apperantly I look stupid because I have a real problem with the way Smudboy presents himself.  I was responding with a what if.  If Smudboy just had 9 minutes of Beavis and Butthead laughing and then made a good point at the end is he still so great?  Oh if I complaing about anything other than that one point at the end of his 9 minutes of laughing I'm an idiot apperanlty.

:huh:
If you're trying to make a pouint it was lost in a downpour of making no sense....

How is it that Smudboys fans are the harshest people who are so happy to attack anyone who has any problem with the guy?  What he can dish it out but he can't take it?

He dishes out valid criticims supported by argumetns. You dish out...nothing. For the last several thread you didn't do anything but go "I hate smudboy. He's arogant. I hate his voice. His music selection sucks!"

Last I checked the way someone talks and comes off as was a valid critism.  No I bring nothing because I can't touch his brilliant analysing.  Whatever...  He decides what is right and what is wrong.  He flat out insults Squee a couple times... He clearly has contempt for anyone who doesn't agree with him.  Proof is right there people getting ignores from his channel for even bringing them up.

Except that still doesn't touch at all his arguments.
And how someone comes off is partially subjective, because people like you are prone to projecting. There is NOTHING insulting about smudboys tone of voice or music selection.

Contempt? Arne't you now showing contempt for him?
And ignoring people? Heck, I'd be doing that too if I were him. I'm sorely tempted to ignore quite a few poeple on these forums.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 30 août 2011 - 11:17 .

[Il Divo]

Geez, it's become a cluster**** in here. Someone just lock this thing already.

[Luigitornado]

ianmcdonald wrote...

Instead of listening to some pretentious dork talk go into nauseating detail about why he doesn't like a video game, I'm going to go punch myself in the face.

Oh that sounds like fun. May I join you, and we can punch our faces together?

[Iakus]

 In a desperate and perhaps futile attempt to get this back on topic and avoid a lock, I'd like to point out that ME2 is not the only game he's reviewed.  Perhaps these will give some insight into what he's looking for in a game's storyline

He also analyzed ME1, starting  here

Also Dragon Age 2 here

[Whatever42]

Yup, this is a Smudboy thread. He doesn't even post here and he's still our most talented troll.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Look in the mirror....

[Whatever42]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Look in the mirror....

Nope, I post here and I'm a fanboy, not a troll. Or is that a "no! u!" response. Cute.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Whatever666343431431654324 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Look in the mirror....

Nope, I post here and I'm a fanboy, not a troll. Or is that a "no! u!" response. Cute.

Often enough fanboy = troll. Like here.

[111987]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

111987 wrote...

In regards to the IFF, I assume you're saying they should have tested on something else first? I suppose they could have, but that wouldn't have really helped. It had to be installed on the Normandy eventually, and when that happened the Collectors would have come for them. The foolish thing wasn't that they didn't test the IFF on something else first; it's just a signal. It's not like it would have blown up the ship. The foolish thing was that they didn't 'scrub' it, which is mentioned explicitly in-game as an oversight.

Yes, they should have tested it on something else first. On a smaller scout ships, or heck - install it in a probe and send it trough the relay.
Once activated, it would send the siognal and the Collectors would arrive in the wrong place.

It is follish to put your vital resources in danger unnecesarily. Adn this wasn't necessary.

If the squad was on board the Normandy when the Collectors attacked, the squad would easily fought them off and thus there would be no sense of urgency to go through the Omega 4 Relay. In my opinion, that would weaken the story. You're right, there isn't an in game explanation for why the whole squad went on the shuttle for the mission.

In this case, gameplay should take precendence over story. Like I said before, your options are unrealistically get the squad off the Normandy for the IFF testing, or lose everyone but two people, which would make completeting the Suicide Mission impossible. Is it great writing to have the squad leave without an in-game explanation? Yes. Is the alternative any better? Not all.

Wrong. Gameplay should not take precedence over story. Gameplay should work WITH the story and vice-versa.
You can make it work and it has been made to work before. But it requires more effort and writing skill.

Just because you would have done things different if you were there personally doesn't make it a case of bad writing. As I said, the IFF is just a signal. If it was something like installing an advanced Reaper engine or drive core, or uploading a Collector AI onto the ship, then tes, you don't test that on the Normandy. Installing the IFF isn't a significant threat to the Normandy. Besides, installing the IFF on a probe or another scout ship would have just resulted in that probe or scout ship's destruction by the Collectors. The Collectors would have just shot those things down the moment they realized it wasn't the Normandy, and Cerberus wouldn't have known what happened to them. So they're back at square one. Eventually, the Normandy would have had to test the IFF and that would have resulted in the Collector's attack.

However, I don't think I can convince you that testing the IFF on the Normandy wasn't bad writing, so I'm willing to agree to disagree.

Also, in regards to story vs gameplay; I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with you. Gameplay ALWAYS takes precedence over story. Gameplay is ultimately the reason games are made. A strong story supplements and can seriously enhance a game's enjoyment or replayability factor, but at the end of the day, gameplay is what matters. There is a reason every game reviewer preferred ME2 to ME1; the gameplay was drastically better in ME2, even if the story wasn't as strong. I don't think you're going to say that dozens of game reviewers are just full of hot air right?

[SpiffySquee]

SpiffySquee wrote...

Guldhun2 wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...

Sheps ressurection was pure stupid and baaly done.
The collector trap was pure stupid and badly done
The IFF trap was pure stupid nd badly done
The collector base was pure stupid and badly done.

Hence, plot holes, stupid and bad writing combined.

even by loose definitions the fact that you think something was stupid does not make it a plot hole. It has to go against something previously established in the narrative, none of those did that. Or it could be someone doing something that is completely contrary to their nature for no reason. None of those examples do that either.

If you want to call it bad writing, go ahead' but that does not make it a plot hole.

http://www.reference...rowse/Plot hole

Thanks for proving my point.

Plot hole
A plot hole  is a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that goes against the flow of logic established by the story's plot.
While
many stories have unanswered questions, unlikely events or chance
occurrences, a plot hole is one that is essential to the story's
outcome.

that is straight from the link you gave. Explain how the above list meets this criteria in any way.

I'm still waiting for you to explain how anything in the above list meets the criteria you provided for a plot hole.


Let me give you a really good example of a plot hole. Thermal clips on Jacobs loyalty mission. They were not invented until 8 years after their ship had been stranded. The fact that the mission has them is impossible according to the logic of previous story.


Shepard Resurrection may have been handled wrong form you point of view. It may be hard to believe from your point of view. It may even be stupid from your point of view. But it is not a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that goes against the flow of logic established by the story's plot. Cerberus developed a new technique. They explained that that is what they did. Unless at some point the story established that it would be impossible for Cerberus to develop new techniques it is not a plot hole. It is a new concept.


The collector trap is also not a plot hole. There is nothing in the story that says it would be impossible for the collectors to lay such a trap. Just because you feel they laid a very bad trap and handled it in a stupid way does not mean this event could not take place. Unlikely events or unanswered questions are not plot holes.


Even I agree the team leaving for the IFF trap could have been handled better and was Bioware dropping the ball. Again, however, there is no plot hole here. Where in the story was it established that they could not all get on a shuttle and leave the ship? Were was it establish that they could not test the IFF on the Normandy first? For it to be a plot hole, you would have to prove that the story informed us that this event could not take place. Again, stupid decisions, or unlikely decisions do not equal plot hole.


The collector base is so broad an idea that I don't even know what you a referring to, but if you mean the entire suicide mission, it is most defiantly not a plot hole. Just because you feel it was stupid to rush in there with a team of 14 does not mean the story established at some point that they could not do this.


You can call all of these bad writing. It's your opinion and you are eintiled to it, but you can not call them Plot holes. At least not by the criteria YOU provided.

[Lotion Soronarr]

111987 wrote...
Also, in regards to story vs gameplay; I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with you. Gameplay ALWAYS takes precedence over story. Gameplay is ultimately the reason games are made. A strong story supplements and can seriously enhance a game's enjoyment or replayability factor, but at the end of the day, gameplay is what matters. There is a reason every game reviewer preferred ME2 to ME1; the gameplay was drastically better in ME2, even if the story wasn't as strong. I don't think you're going to say that dozens of game reviewers are just full of hot air right?

I dunno. After DA2 and it's scores I'm not sure anymore...

You're treating gamepaly and story as two competing things, thinking that one MUST be sacrificed to facilitate the other. That is incorrect. Gameplay and story are only in conflict if you let them be. You either suck at writing or suck at designing the game if you can't make them work together in harmony.

[Guldhun2]

SpiffySquee wrote...
The collector trap is also not a plot
hole. There is nothing in the story that says it would be impossible for
the collectors to lay such a trap. Just because you feel they laid a
very bad trap and handled it in a stupid way does not mean this event
could not take place. Unlikely events or unanswered questions are not
plot holes.

Collectors(Reapers) luring Shepard in a ship by leading him directly to a command console so he can hack it to get information goes against character logic. AIs are pretty common in the galaxy, so not expecting one even though they used the Geth, an AI army made by one of the races in the Galaxy is retarted.

So i'll admit,if it's lore and cannon that Reapers = retarted -> Then yes it's not a plot hole.

Modifié par Guldhun2, 30 août 2011 - 02:57 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

SpiffySquee wrote...
You can call all of these bad writing.

I am doing that.

It's your opinion and you are eintiled to it, but you can not call them Plot holes. At least not by the criteria YOU provided.

Since they are bad writing and plot holes are bad writing, the difference would be purely semantical anway.
It's bad writing anyway, weather you classify all of them as plot holes or not.

[SpiffySquee]

Guldhun2 wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...
The collector trap is also not a plot
hole. There is nothing in the story that says it would be impossible for
the collectors to lay such a trap. Just because you feel they laid a
very bad trap and handled it in a stupid way does not mean this event
could not take place. Unlikely events or unanswered questions are not
plot holes.

Collectors(Reapers) luring Shepard in a ship by leading him directly to a command console so he can hack it to get information goes against character logic. AIs are pretty common in the galaxy, so not expecting one even though they used the Geth, an AI army made by one of the races of the Galaxy is retarted.

So i'll admit,if it's lore and cannon that Reapers = retarted -> Then yes it's not a plot hole.

Goes against what character logic? You know nothing about them. How can you pretend you can say something is out of character when you have no idea what their character is?

So you think it was a stupid move. Noted. However, since thinking the Reapers are retarded does not make something a plot hole, I guess you agree none of these are plot holes. So I'm still waiting... point out a significant plot hole in ME2.

[111987]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

111987 wrote...
Also, in regards to story vs gameplay; I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with you. Gameplay ALWAYS takes precedence over story. Gameplay is ultimately the reason games are made. A strong story supplements and can seriously enhance a game's enjoyment or replayability factor, but at the end of the day, gameplay is what matters. There is a reason every game reviewer preferred ME2 to ME1; the gameplay was drastically better in ME2, even if the story wasn't as strong. I don't think you're going to say that dozens of game reviewers are just full of hot air right?

I dunno. After DA2 and it's scores I'm not sure anymore...

You're treating gamepaly and story as two competing things, thinking that one MUST be sacrificed to facilitate the other. That is incorrect. Gameplay and story are only in conflict if you let them be. You either suck at writing or suck at designing the game if you can't make them work together in harmony.

i wouldn't say that gameplay and story are competing against one another. And I definitely agree that if you can make them mesh flawlessly, it should be done. And for the most part in Mass Effect 2, they don't conflict with one another. But for the sake of enjoyable gameplay, you have to do things or allow things that the story by itself wouldn't allow. Take for example the death of the squad leader in the suicide mission; they die from getting shot in the stomach? I've seen my squadmates survive a lot worse than that in gameplay. You have to make certain allowances for gameplay.

I agree that an in-game reason for the shuttle ride would have been nice and and helped with the immersion factor games like this are supposed to have. What I'm arguing is that I don't think the idea of the squadmates being abducted by the Collectors is a good idea.

[Guldhun2]

SpiffySquee wrote...
Goes against what character logic? You know nothing about them. How can you pretend you can say something is out of character when you have no idea what their character is?

So you think it was a stupid move. Noted. However, since thinking the Reapers are retarded does not make something a plot hole, I guess you agree none of these are plot holes. So I'm still waiting... point out a significant plot hole in ME2.

Reapers are retarted now? Ok then, ME3 is going to be pretty boring.

[Fixers0]

SpiffySquee wrote...

So you think it was a stupid move. Noted. However, since thinking that the Reapers Were made retarded for plot convienance because the writers didn't know how the write a compelling story does make something a plot hole.

Fixed.

[111987]

Guldhun2 wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...
The collector trap is also not a plot
hole. There is nothing in the story that says it would be impossible for
the collectors to lay such a trap. Just because you feel they laid a
very bad trap and handled it in a stupid way does not mean this event
could not take place. Unlikely events or unanswered questions are not
plot holes.

Collectors(Reapers) luring Shepard in a ship by leading him directly to a command console so he can hack it to get information goes against character logic. AIs are pretty common in the galaxy, so not expecting one even though they used the Geth, an AI army made by one of the races in the Galaxy is retarted.

So i'll admit,if it's lore and cannon that Reapers = retarted -> Then yes it's not a plot hole.

AI's are NOT common in the galaxy, outside of the Geth (who were not allied with Shepard at the time). AI's installed onto ships are also uncommon; in fact EDI could be the only one. AI's based off of Reaper technology are entirely unheard of.

They lured Shepard to a series of platforms suspended like a hundred or more feet in the air, where he would have been trapped without EDI. It was a great trap that was foiled by unforseeable circumstances.

[Guldhun2]

111987 wrote...

Guldhun2 wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...
The collector trap is also not a plot
hole. There is nothing in the story that says it would be impossible for
the collectors to lay such a trap. Just because you feel they laid a
very bad trap and handled it in a stupid way does not mean this event
could not take place. Unlikely events or unanswered questions are not
plot holes.

Collectors(Reapers) luring Shepard in a ship by leading him directly to a command console so he can hack it to get information goes against character logic. AIs are pretty common in the galaxy, so not expecting one even though they used the Geth, an AI army made by one of the races in the Galaxy is retarted.

So i'll admit,if it's lore and cannon that Reapers = retarted -> Then yes it's not a plot hole.

AI's are NOT common in the galaxy, outside of the Geth (who were not allied with Shepard at the time). AI's installed onto ships are also uncommon; in fact EDI could be the only one. AI's based off of Reaper technology are entirely unheard of.

They lured Shepard to a series of platforms suspended like a hundred or more feet in the air, where he would have been trapped without EDI. It was a great trap that was foiled by unforseeable circumstances.

What about luring him on a platform...that doesn't has a command console to hack.


Edit: And AIs are common in the galaxy.

Modifié par Guldhun2, 30 août 2011 - 03:07 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

111987 wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

111987 wrote...
Also, in regards to story vs gameplay; I'm afraid I'll have to disagree with you. Gameplay ALWAYS takes precedence over story. Gameplay is ultimately the reason games are made. A strong story supplements and can seriously enhance a game's enjoyment or replayability factor, but at the end of the day, gameplay is what matters. There is a reason every game reviewer preferred ME2 to ME1; the gameplay was drastically better in ME2, even if the story wasn't as strong. I don't think you're going to say that dozens of game reviewers are just full of hot air right?

I dunno. After DA2 and it's scores I'm not sure anymore...

You're treating gamepaly and story as two competing things, thinking that one MUST be sacrificed to facilitate the other. That is incorrect. Gameplay and story are only in conflict if you let them be. You either suck at writing or suck at designing the game if you can't make them work together in harmony.

i wouldn't say that gameplay and story are competing against one another. And I definitely agree that if you can make them mesh flawlessly, it should be done. And for the most part in Mass Effect 2, they don't conflict with one another. But for the sake of enjoyable gameplay, you have to do things or allow things that the story by itself wouldn't allow. Take for example the death of the squad leader in the suicide mission; they die from getting shot in the stomach? I've seen my squadmates survive a lot worse than that in gameplay. You have to make certain allowances for gameplay.

I agree that an in-game reason for the shuttle ride would have been nice and and helped with the immersion factor games like this are supposed to have. What I'm arguing is that I don't think the idea of the squadmates being abducted by the Collectors is a good idea.

Meh.. Squadmate deaths were both bad gamepaly mechanics and bad writing. WTF does their loyality mission haev to do with their survival???

[111987]

Guldhun2 wrote...

111987 wrote...

Guldhun2 wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...
The collector trap is also not a plot
hole. There is nothing in the story that says it would be impossible for
the collectors to lay such a trap. Just because you feel they laid a
very bad trap and handled it in a stupid way does not mean this event
could not take place. Unlikely events or unanswered questions are not
plot holes.

Collectors(Reapers) luring Shepard in a ship by leading him directly to a command console so he can hack it to get information goes against character logic. AIs are pretty common in the galaxy, so not expecting one even though they used the Geth, an AI army made by one of the races in the Galaxy is retarted.

So i'll admit,if it's lore and cannon that Reapers = retarted -> Then yes it's not a plot hole.

AI's are NOT common in the galaxy, outside of the Geth (who were not allied with Shepard at the time). AI's installed onto ships are also uncommon; in fact EDI could be the only one. AI's based off of Reaper technology are entirely unheard of.

They lured Shepard to a series of platforms suspended like a hundred or more feet in the air, where he would have been trapped without EDI. It was a great trap that was foiled by unforseeable circumstances.

What about luring him on a platform...that doesn't has a command console to hack.

Why would that matter? Without an AI, particularly an AI as sophisticated as EDI, it wouldn't have helped Shepard at all to have a command console.

[SpiffySquee]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

SpiffySquee wrote...
You can call all of these bad writing.

I am doing that.

It's your opinion and you are eintiled to it, but you can not call them Plot holes. At least not by the criteria YOU provided.

Since they are bad writing and plot holes are bad writing, the difference would be purely semantical anway.
It's bad writing anyway, weather you classify all of them as plot holes or not.

You said they were plot holes. I showed they are not. That was the point. Whether or not you think it is bad writing does not change the fact that you were wrong. You should really learn what a term means before you use it.

[Whatever42]

Just as a note: AIs are practically banned in the galaxy. VIs are common but dumb as a box of hammers.