177 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaiser Shepard]

Neurotics wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Neurotics wrote...

Wait untill Mass Effect 3.
I predict massive repercussions for your actions from both games.

That kind of attitude by over half the board is why we'll end up without any major consequences of our actions, at all.

...What?

Because, after just ME1 the consensus seemed to be that our choices would've mattered in both ME2 and ME3. Currently, after ME2, a majority of BSN is still like "Meh, they will obviously make up for it with ME3, that I don't doubt.", while a small minority is starting to doubt said choices ever mattering at all.

Based on what we know so far, though, not even the Collector Base decision is going to matter like we expected and/or wanted to; the Paragons get to witness how Cerberus got their tech, regardless of their decision, while the Renegade "Cerbies" get the same for their continued employment by Cerberus. When both big endgame choices fail to matter in the significant way we took for granted, what choices are going to matter?

Modifié par Kaiser Shepard, 12 septembre 2011 - 12:54 .

[Mr Arg]

LeVaughnX wrote...

The problem here is - why didn't they just make it one story per game then?

Welcome to trilogies.

Star Wars, Mass Effect and Halo are good examples. A New Hope could have just stopped there, but it didn't; as soon as ep. 5 happened the story had to finish in a next installment. Halo: chief rides off into space sunset; H2 happens and guess what? he had to finish the fight. Mass effect 1: "the reapers are still out there" [shepard wal off into presidium hallway/off shot sunset] If the series ended there, the rest would have been up to imagination. Me2 comes along and reapers are pissed and sprawl on screen.

Essentially, the trilogy formula is:

#1 is stand alone and series could end there, #2 continues story and needs a #3 to resolve story.

[KotorEffect3]

It is apparent that there are many on the forums that do not know how trilogies work. Yes most of the stuff that carried over to ME 2 was in the form of dialog, news reports, emails, and cameos but the thing is ME 2 still had to account for ME 3 so there was less room for major repercussions creating even more variables. If ME 2 had been more impacted by things from ME 1 than it would have made it even harder to impliment all those variables into ME 3. ME 3 is the climax it is where we see the results of all our decisions for good or bad.

[KotorEffect3]

jreezy wrote...

AwesomeEffect2 wrote...

jreezy wrote...

KotorEffect3 wrote...

It is apparent that there are many on the forums that do not know how trilogies work. Yes most of the stuff that carried over to ME 2 was in the form of dialog, news reports, emails, and cameos but the thing is ME 2 still had to account for ME 3 so there was less room for major repercussions creating even more variables. If ME 2 had been more impacted by things from ME 1 than it would have made it even harder to impliment all those variables into ME 3. ME 3 is the climax it is where we see the results of all our decisions for good or bad.

Pretty much how BioWare explained it. It makes a lot of sense too.

http://social.biowar...index/8071018/1

So what was I supposed to see there?

Just another thread where people were whining about the marketing being hyperreactive, hating on bioware.  Typical day at the bsn.

[Whatever42]

What a very odd post.

I mean, I can understand the complaints of many critics on this board, even if I disagree with them, but this one is uses just the oddest examples to make his point.

[Twizz089]

KotorEffect3 wrote...

oh brother it is another complainer that doesn't understand how trilogies work.

didymos1120 wrote...


Please substantiate this assertion on which your
whole thesis relies.  And no, simply pointing at the game again doesn't
count.

jreezy wrote...

You know what's funny about this? The OP is
probably serious about everything that is in that post.

Mr Arg wrote...

I just realized a very bad flaw with the
poster:

They don't know enough about what they're saying. Consequently,
made a hurp derp.

and like Starcloud said... previously on mass
effect...

It amuses me when people ridicule and talk down to a person on a forum who is merely stating their opinion. 

[didymos1120]

jreezy wrote...

So what was I supposed to see there?

Your supposed to freak out and interpret some goofy thing David Silverman said in the worst possible way, and thus be enlightened or something.

[didymos1120]

Twizz089 wrote...

It amuses me when people ridicule and talk down to a person on a forum who is merely stating their opinion. 

It amuses me that you find a problem with me asking for someone to back up their unevidenced assertions on a DISCUSSION board. Should I have just silently nodded in agreement or posted "ME TOO!" or "Cool story, bro" and gone on my way?  Or is it just that I wasn't asking nicely enough to suit you?

Modifié par didymos1120, 12 septembre 2011 - 01:29 .

[Twizz089]

didymos1120 wrote...


It amuses me that you find a problem with asking for people to back up their unevidenced assertions on a DISCUSSION board.

Funny, I dont remember saying that I found a problem with people asking a person to back up their claims

Modifié par Twizz089, 12 septembre 2011 - 01:30 .

[Ace of Dawn]

didymos1120 wrote...

Twizz089 wrote...

It amuses me when people ridicule and talk down to a person on a forum who is merely stating their opinion. 

It amuses me that you find a problem with me asking for someone to back up their unevidenced assertions on a DISCUSSION board. Should I have just silently nodded in agreement or posted "ME TOO!" or "Cool story, bro" and gone on my way?

Exactly.

Opinions are all well and good. Some people are of the opinion that the moon is made of cheese, the earth is hollow, and lizard-men control the earth.

Have your opinions, but if you're going to express them, be ready to back them up.

As he said, should we all have agreed? Or stated *our* opinions?

[marshalleck]

Attention fanboys! All aboard the fanpile!

[didymos1120]

Twizz089 wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...


It amuses me that you find a problem with asking for people to back up their unevidenced assertions on a DISCUSSION board.

Funny, I dont remeber saying that I found a problem with people asking a person to back up their claims

You quoted me doing just that, and then condemned it because you see it as "talking down" to someone just for "stating their opinion".  So what exactly is your issue?

[Twizz089]

Ace of Dawn wrote...

didymos1120 wrote...

Twizz089 wrote...

It amuses me when people ridicule and talk down to a person on a forum who is merely stating their opinion. 

It amuses me that you find a problem with me asking for someone to back up their unevidenced assertions on a DISCUSSION board. Should I have just silently nodded in agreement or posted "ME TOO!" or "Cool story, bro" and gone on my way?

Exactly.

Opinions are all well and good. Some people are of the opinion that the moon is made of cheese, the earth is hollow, and lizard-men control the earth.

Have your opinions, but if you're going to express them, be ready to back them up.

As he said, should we all have agreed? Or stated *our* opinions?

There is a difference between disscusing a person's opinion and talking down to them for having that opinion.