896 réponses à ce sujet

[Someone With Mass]

GreenDragon37 wrote...
Millions that I never see or care about as much as those I do care about. And watch who you are calling "warmonger".

It's good to know that the galaxy's fate is resting in the hands of man/woman who simply don't give a flying **** about anyone but his/her own team.

[BlueMagitek]

If the mandatory deaths are done well then I don't have a problem with them.

Though I think that if there was a *very* difficult way of saving them available, the death would hit harder, because it would be *your* failing, not the hand of the plot reaper.

[GreenDragon37]

TheOptimist wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

Because Shep is Human, he/she has flaws. As do his/her squadmates. The greatest threat that the galaxy has ever faced is no-longer distant... it's here, right now, in a mostly un-prepared galaxy. From the sounds of everything, Shep's squad will be heading right into the thick of the Reaper invasion points. I think people realize that now, Shep can't save everyone on his team, not while the Reapers are here and throwing everything they can at them.

Again, you just say Shep can't, why not?  What's stopping Shepard?  Shepard is a supreme badass with a squad of almost as awesome badasses.  They have survived ridiculous injuries and in Sheps case death itself.  There is no good reason why Shep should be forced to lose squadmates.  If a 3/4 destroyed home planet isn't an emotional impact, what is?

3/4s of a planet of people that you don't know. It's easy to just kill the people on Earth and brush it off. Heck, many Sheps probably aren't even from Earth, and other couldn't care less if Earth burns (like those out in the Terminus, or even those in these forums). And while Shep may be a badass, he/she isn't infalliale, he/she does lose people. Elysium, Akuze, Torfan.

[nitefyre410]

TheOptimist wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

TheOptimist wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

I just wonder why all the people who don't want anyone to die aren't off playing, I don't know, farmville or something. Why do you expect to play a war game--and not just war, but war with a species almost infinitely more capable than yourself--and not lose people?

Again, we already lost a **** ton of people.  Rooting for more death just for the sake of your misplaced sense of drama is just ludicrous.  I could say the samething to you folks, want mass death and high drama? Go play LA Noire or GTA.  This is a story about a hero, not about someone who wasn't quite good enough.

A **** ton of people that you never actually saw or talked to. Even heros have faults. Even heros lose sometimes. Look at the Dark Knight.

You know why I've watched Iron Man 2 a bunch of times and the Dark Knight just once? Yeah.  

 


Oh boy  who is more  ****ed up the  Alcoholic or the  man  running dress as  bat at night?...  discuss.

[Sesshomaru47]

I remember my brothers first play through where after romancing Tali she died and Shep was like "oh well, move on" I thought geez what a tool, he didn't even seem to give a rats doodie his girlfriend just got killed in front of him. I hope they fix that and go back to ME1's style of handling a team death. Not that I think he should have laid across her body and screamed out "why why why", but after couldn't he have been angry and taken it out on TIM?

[GreenDragon37]

Someone With Mass wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...
Millions that I never see or care about as much as those I do care about. And watch who you are calling "warmonger".

It's good to know that the galaxy's fate is resting in the hands of man/woman who simply don't give a flying **** about anyone but his/her own team.

When did I say I didn't care about those on Earth? I said I care about them less than I care about my own people. Do you love everyone as much as you love your own family? It's essentially like that. I care about Humanity, but it would hurt worse if a member of my family died than, say, a random hobo on the street.

You sure make a lot of base-less accusations.

Modifié par GreenDragon37, 31 août 2011 - 02:02 .

[TheOptimist]

GreenDragon37 wrote...

What if my tastes were to join Seran? Maybe I wanted to join the Reapers? Those are my tastes, yours may run different. It's a choice!

See, when telling a story, you just have to accept that you can't have everything as a choice. There are things that are... enivitable, and we have to deal with it.

Then I hope you can join the Reapers.  And we already know Mass Effect didn't have as much choice as we would like, look at the Virmire choice.  One hopes the sequels will offer more choices, that Bioware gets better at offering those choices, and I believe they did in ME 2. And death is inevitable...but there is no reason your squadmates should have to die at this particular time.

[Ghost Warrior]

crimzontearz wrote...


because taking away the choice of having a perfect ending simply because you believe that with it the game is less worthy implies my opinion is less than yours in importance and YOUR idea of a satisfying ending is "better" and will be the "ceiling" of "good" endings thus excluding mine (or someone else's)

Then because giving the choice of having a perfect ending simply because you believe that without it the game is less worthy implies my opinion is less than yours in importance and YOUR idea of a satisfying ending is "better" and will be the "ceiling" of "good" endings thus ignoring my (or someone else's) view of the best ending.      See how it works?

Bioware will gice you the toold to tell your story the way you want it.....use them. If by any chance they DO allow you to have a perfect ending you will be free not to choose it

everyone wins

You still don't get the point,do you? I don't want to intentionally fail. I want to be able to end the game with certain losses,knowing I did the best I could.

[GreenDragon37]

TheOptimist wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

What if my tastes were to join Seran? Maybe I wanted to join the Reapers? Those are my tastes, yours may run different. It's a choice!

See, when telling a story, you just have to accept that you can't have everything as a choice. There are things that are... enivitable, and we have to deal with it.

Then I hope you can join the Reapers.  And we already know Mass Effect didn't have as much choice as we would like, look at the Virmire choice.  One hopes the sequels will offer more choices, that Bioware gets better at offering those choices, and I believe they did in ME 2. And death is inevitable...but there is no reason your squadmates should have to die at this particular time.

Why not this particular time? You know, the time of the actual REAPER INVASION!? The giant machines who have exterminated trillions of millions of years?

[nitefyre410]

Ghost Warrior wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...


because taking away the choice of having a perfect ending simply because you believe that with it the game is less worthy implies my opinion is less than yours in importance and YOUR idea of a satisfying ending is "better" and will be the "ceiling" of "good" endings thus excluding mine (or someone else's)

Then because giving the choice of having a perfect ending simply because you believe that without it the game is less worthy implies my opinion is less than yours in importance and YOUR idea of a satisfying ending is "better" and will be the "ceiling" of "good" endings thus ignoring my (or someone else's) view of the best ending.      See how it works?

Bioware will gice you the toold to tell your story the way you want it.....use them. If by any chance they DO allow you to have a perfect ending you will be free not to choose it

everyone wins

You still don't get the point,do you? I don't want to intentionally fail. I want to be able to end the game with certain losses,knowing I did the best I could.

 

Right but what  Crimizon and I to something extent are trying to say is that If they   give you that and take away the choice and option for the perfect ending - its betraying the core  premise of the game design.  The game design being  is put the player in the would where they can have some major impact on the world and characters around them.

its not about having character death or not.

[Undertone]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Undertone wrote...

Because it's a war story and not a 10 year old kid's game/book/movie.

Oh. Then Mass Effect 3 is losing by default.

Because I doubt they could do something like this and get away with it.

By the way. People have already died by the millions across the galaxy. If that's not enough to still your warmongering, you have issues.

People that have nothing to do with me directly. Just as much as you don't give a **** with what happens in the Africa let's say or this random guy who had a car accident. Statistics babe. It's a little different though when someone you know dies right? So don't play dumb.

I might have issues  but at least I'm not some snot-nosed, soft fool that has never had any kind of challenge in life and hence desires for bunnies and rainbows.

I'm never the one to actually argue that people should have less choice in favor of something that I want or support. It's buzzing trolls like you (and a few others) however that are incomprehensible of understanding someone else's opinion and where they come from. 

[Someone With Mass]

GreenDragon37 wrote...
What if my tastes were to join Seran? Maybe I wanted to join the Reapers? Those are my tastes, yours may run different. It's a choice!

See, when telling a story, you just have to accept that you can't have everything as a choice. There are things that are... enivitable, and we have to deal with it.

So...if I want to know a character on my squad more or keep him/her alive because I start to really like that character, but then someone/something kills that character, and I'm just supposed to accept that?

I don't know about you, but I would call that a waste of a good and interesting character.

Death won't achieve anything. 

I'd just feel sorry for a couple of minutes and then move on. Wow, I sure am glad that unavoidable death really brought a new level of depth to that character, even though the character progression completely ends at that point. I'm probably going to feel sorry every single time that happens. It won't get old or on my nerves or anything.

[TheOptimist]

GreenDragon37 wrote...

3/4s of a planet of people that you don't know. It's easy to just kill the people on Earth and brush it off.

Uh, no.  No it is not.  Or atleast it shouldn't be...

Heck, many Sheps probably aren't even from Earth, and other couldn't care less if Earth burns (like those out in the Terminus, or even those in these forums).

 
And you think squadmate death will matter to those people...why?  Hell, there are people on these forums who advocate betraying civilization to the Reapers, including all your squadmates.  There is a damn guide to how to kill the maximum number of squaddies for giggles. 

And while Shep may be a badass, he/she isn't infalliale, he/she does lose people. Elysium, Akuze, Torfan.

Yep, my Shep lost people on Elysium.  But Shep saved the planet and beat the invasion.  We don't know much about what happened on Elysium, other than Shepard held off the Blitz nearly single handed at one point. It would be interesting to see some DLC on that at some point.

[Undertone]

Someone With Mass wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...
What if my tastes were to join Seran? Maybe I wanted to join the Reapers? Those are my tastes, yours may run different. It's a choice!

See, when telling a story, you just have to accept that you can't have everything as a choice. There are things that are... enivitable, and we have to deal with it.

So...if I want to know a character on my squad more or keep him/her alive because I start to really like that character, but then someone/something kills that character, and I'm just supposed to accept that?

I don't know about you, but I would call that a waste of a good and interesting character.

Death won't achieve anything. 

I'd just feel sorry for a couple of minutes and then move on. Wow, I sure am glad that unavoidable death really brought a new level of depth to that character, even though the character progression completely ends at that point. I'm probably going to feel sorry every single time that happens. It won't get old or on my nerves or anything.

Yay let's give plot armor to anyone we like

[nitefyre410]

And as Typical of the BSN as rather good discussion falls into the SOP of throwing insults around and complete overreaction.

[karatemanchan37]

GreenDragon37 wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

If no-one dies, it cheapens the experience. The Reapers have come, I expect there to be some deaths. However, they should be avoidable and others you can choose who has to die. You don't have to have your LI or favorite character die, but someone should. I don't want a kids' story. I want a mature story, with deaths because you either screwed up, or your squaddies were idiots. I want to be reminded what was lost to defeat the Reapers. Face-less "millions" won't cut it.

As long as no major character death (well ok maybe one but not your LI) is forced upon me without choice and without  the possibility to change the outcome in a following run  then I'm ok with it

 

Exactly its what the franchise  is built it on - Choice

As for maturity...  Killing characters off in  story does not make it mature , it just means your killing off  characters and cheapens the story more than not killing people off.

And having them all live is not mature, especially now that the Reaper invasion has come. Deaths need to happen, but they need to be a product of your choice, and they need to be meaningful, not just because the game said so. If everyone can live, it'll be like the SM: laughable.

 


Character Death  can happen  but It should  not happen  just to make a story Mature or to create emotion  - That is cheap.   Your choices can be meaningful  either way.  Killing off Characters it not going  make themes of the story more mature if they are already immature for the start.       

And having everyone live is cheap. It'll make me laugh at this "Reaper threat" if they couldn't even take down one man in my squad. No, you don't need death to create emotion, but if no-one dies, then it cheapens the "Reaper threat".

Which is why I believe that the formula used in ME2 was near-perfect - virtually everybody in the game could die, and who really does depends on the choices the players make, functioning as both a emotioal and themetical progress to the game. However, the developers were smart enough to make the choices small and hidden enough that the players will often ignore them to move the story. What this means is that Bioware is trying to illustrate the character deaths as forced, when in fact it's dependent on choice all along.

The Collector Base itself is a great example. Remember that while it is straightforward that the game expects you to gain everyone's loyalty, it didn't give any suggestions on ship upgrades or what role will everything do at the base.  How many times have people restarted when they realized that Jacob won't really survive the vents? Or that Mordin dies very easily? Or Thane getting killed without cannon upgrades? The game also makes it clear that it was going to be a Suicide Mission from the get-go; in fact, it doesn't even seem possible to end the game without anyone dying. It's trying to trick you that someone will be sacrificed, when there could be other options .

[Zu Long]

As far as emotional death, actually thought Shepards death was pretty sad, but where Bioware really hit the nail on the head was Navigator Pressly. I don't mind saying there were tears in my eyes when I read that datapad on Alchera.

That said, I liked that we had the choice to save people in ME 2. It felt awesome to be able to say "no, I'm saving everyone." I understand death as a dramatic tool, but at the end of the day, I play Mass Effect for FUN, and it's not really a whole lot of fun for me to have my favorite characters die without any say in it, especially in a series where your ability to choose is emphasized.

[GreenDragon37]

Someone With Mass wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...
What if my tastes were to join Seran? Maybe I wanted to join the Reapers? Those are my tastes, yours may run different. It's a choice!

See, when telling a story, you just have to accept that you can't have everything as a choice. There are things that are... enivitable, and we have to deal with it.

So...if I want to know a character on my squad more or keep him/her alive because I start to really like that character, but then someone/something kills that character, and I'm just supposed to accept that?

I don't know about you, but I would call that a waste of a good and interesting character.

Death won't achieve anything. 

I'd just feel sorry for a couple of minutes and then move on. Wow, I sure am glad that unavoidable death really brought a new level of depth to that character, even though the character progression completely ends at that point. I'm probably going to feel sorry every single time that happens. It won't get old or on my nerves or anything.

So... then it would be a product of your own fault. You had to sacrifice something/someone else in order to save that person. Maybe you made a choice that led to that person's death? It could have been avoided if you did X or Y.

You say you want choices, but you are not ready to accept the consequences.

[nitefyre410]

Zu Long wrote...

As far as emotional death, actually thought Shepards death was pretty sad, but where Bioware really hit the nail on the head was Navigator Pressly. I don't mind saying there were tears in my eyes when I read that datapad on Alchera.

That said, I liked that we had the choice to save people in ME 2. It felt awesome to be able to say "no, I'm saving everyone." I understand death as a dramatic tool, but at the end of the day, I play Mass Effect for FUN, and it's not really a whole lot of fun for me to have my favorite characters die without any say in it, especially in a series where your ability to choose is emphasized.

 


THANK  YOU  ZU... exactly.

[Gorosaur]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Undertone wrote...

Because it's a war story and not a 10 year old kid's game/book/movie.

Oh. Then Mass Effect 3 is losing by default.

Because I doubt they could do something like this and get away with it.

By the way. People have already died by the millions across the galaxy. If that's not enough to still your warmongering, you have issues.

I would honestly really like it if they had a war story with the amount of emotion Saving Private Ryan did. I mean, it would be heart breaking if done well, but it also could be one of the most powerful experiences I've ever seen in a video game.

[TheOptimist]

GreenDragon37 wrote...
Why not this particular time? You know, the time of the actual REAPER INVASION!? The giant machines who have exterminated trillions of millions of years?

Indeed, why not?  Because they're just that badass, that's why not.

[Ghost Warrior]

nitefyre410 wrote...


Right but what  Crimizon and I to something extent are trying to say is that If they   give you that and take away the choice and option for the perfect ending - its betraying the core  premise of the game design.  The game design being  is put the player in the would where they can have some major impact on the world and characters around them.

its not about having character death or not.

No it's not. Remember ME1 ending: you had to choose between the Alliance fleet and Destiny Ascension. You weren't able to save both.
So let's say that during the ME3,game leads to Garrus being on Palaven and Tali on Flotila (it's actually possible,they said there wil be such thing as temporary squadmates). And just like in ME1,you have to choose which one to save. Would that be a betrayal of the game's premise or taking away the choice? - No.

[nitefyre410]

Gorosaur wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

Undertone wrote...

Because it's a war story and not a 10 year old kid's game/book/movie.

Oh. Then Mass Effect 3 is losing by default.

Because I doubt they could do something like this and get away with it.

By the way. People have already died by the millions across the galaxy. If that's not enough to still your warmongering, you have issues.

I would honestly really like it if they had a war story with the amount of emotion Saving Private Ryan did. I mean, it would be heart breaking if done well, but it also could be one of the most powerful experiences I've ever seen in a video game.

 

I would too but then they would have to take all the choice out the player hands  as far controling how  MC  reacts to death of squadmates around him.   

[Kyria Nyriese]

OK Bioware has said sacrifices will be made, they also said that it would be difficult to come through the SM with everyone alive, yet somehow I made it through on the first play through without losing anyone. So I'm going to take things with a grain of salt when it comes to people getting killed in ME3. While I believe wholeheartedly that if you make the wrong decisions people will die, I'm betting there will be a way to keep it from happening as well.