152 réponses à ce sujet

[Il Divo]

Frostmourne86 wrote...

Almostfaceman wrote...

Yeah he died in ME2. So... why are you bringing this up in the ME3 forum?

Because, if you look at the Forum links at the top of the page, you would see that this is the Mass Effect 2 Official Campaign Quests and Storylines.

That's because this topic was moved. The poster you are referring to made that post when this thread was in the ME3 forums.

[Ananka]

I'm hoping we'll see a bit more of Shepard's emotions in ME3. The things (s)he has been through in ME and ME2 would affect anybody psychologically. Dyring or being near death IS traumatizing for most people. I think it is only fair to think that Shepard should have some scars from that. On the other hand, Shep has been through plenty of traumatiazinng experiences in his/her life (For example Akuze, which would be quite emotionally scarring for most people) and is obviously portrayed as having a quite impressive mental strength. I do like the parts where we see Shepard expressing her feelings about the mission and what has happened, though, for example in the Jacob romance and in LotSB.

Personally, I liked the story plot of Shepard getting killed. I wish BW had done a bit more of it when meeting former allies, but it's not a game-ruining problem. I'm going for him/her being in denial and that (s)he'll be more affected by it in ME3.

Modifié par Annaka, 08 octobre 2011 - 08:09 .

[Pro_Consul]

d1sciple wrote...

i think sheps behaviour and what seems like ignorance of the situation more than fits with his character and the overall story. he has to sell his soul to the devil as the devil is the only one willing to help.

Shep's behavior can perhaps be excused, but rest of the whole flippin' universe is behaving inconsistently. The very people who gush about how big a hero he WAS (note the tense), and how tragic his death was, are the very one's who don't bat an eye when he suddenly pops up very much alive. Bottom line: the issue isn't just that Shep grossly UNderreactes to his own death, but that everybody underreacts to it.

d1sciple wrote...

there could always be more, but it is a game not a novel and the lapse of time with little to know explanation has been used to good effect in movies and literature for years.

That whole "its a game not a novel" line is a cop out. This is not Asteroids or Donkey Kong, where nobody is even attempting to tell a compelling story. It may be a game, but BW was very much attempting to tell a compelling story, in the form of an interactive novel you might say. And perhaps their most accomplished writer has already published novels based on this very story. So the fact that this particular part of the story is being told in a game in no way excuses the writers for bungling this plot point so egregiously.

All that said, it's still a kickass game! But let's not pretend there wasn't room for improvement.

[d1sciple]

i didn't mean it as a cop out. the best comparison is something like ME against Final Fantasy, another franchise praised for it's great storytelling. to do that though we're looking at FF games that have an average playtime of over 100 hours, there's alot more room in there to move, fill plot holes, create and fulfil major twists etc.

the time lapse is something used in movies particularly well, and especially in sequels/trilogies. with just a couple lines of text you can explain away the last few years, even if those years are filled with epic scale events.

what we have in ME2 is a 2 year gap that's explained and partially dealt with before you get back to your old team, so when you do meet up with them it's personal in scale.
i agree that some of those meetings are frustrating but i do love the subtlety. shep and Garrus reunite like old friends, happy to see eachother and also happy to not talk about the past. that fit's with Garrus personality completely.
it's the same with shep and Wrex, he's just happy to see shep and they get on like it's back to business.
as for shep and Tali she had deeper feelings for shep so is disillusioned and tells him so, she's also not only sceptical but mad at him being with Cerberus. Ash/Kaiden are the same. remember nothing is completely explained to them, they didn't even really know if shep was dead or not so they aren't shocked about coming back from the dead specifically, more about the 2 year gap. Garrus and Wrex can instantly see that their friend and comrade is back, Tali and Ash/Kaiden are different, due to their personal feelings.

again i agree that these meetings, including Jokers(who did know sheps story ), Andersons(who idolises shep) and Liaras could of been more but it tells it's story subtly instead of bashing you over the head as it's not the whole point of ME2's plot. sheps blindness and manipulation by TIM is.

[Iakus]

d1sciple wrote...

i didn't mean it as a cop out. the best comparison is something like ME against Final Fantasy, another franchise praised for it's great storytelling. to do that though we're looking at FF games that have an average playtime of over 100 hours, there's alot more room in there to move, fill plot holes, create and fulfil major twists etc.

the time lapse is something used in movies particularly well, and especially in sequels/trilogies. with just a couple lines of text you can explain away the last few years, even if those years are filled with epic scale events.

what we have in ME2 is a 2 year gap that's explained and partially dealt with before you get back to your old team, so when you do meet up with them it's personal in scale.
i agree that some of those meetings are frustrating but i do love the subtlety. shep and Garrus reunite like old friends, happy to see eachother and also happy to not talk about the past. that fit's with Garrus personality completely.
it's the same with shep and Wrex, he's just happy to see shep and they get on like it's back to business.
as for shep and Tali she had deeper feelings for shep so is disillusioned and tells him so, she's also not only sceptical but mad at him being with Cerberus. Ash/Kaiden are the same. remember nothing is completely explained to them, they didn't even really know if shep was dead or not so they aren't shocked about coming back from the dead specifically, more about the 2 year gap. Garrus and Wrex can instantly see that their friend and comrade is back, Tali and Ash/Kaiden are different, due to their personal feelings.

again i agree that these meetings, including Jokers(who did know sheps story ), Andersons(who idolises shep) and Liaras could of been more but it tells it's story subtly instead of bashing you over the head as it's not the whole point of ME2's plot. sheps blindness and manipulation by TIM is.

All of this could have been accomplished with any method of removing Shepard for two years.  Death is not a subtle means of doing so.  In fact, the manner of Shepard's death appeared to be designed to "bash us over the head" with the fact that he's dead and gone.  

The fact that Shepard has been away and is now semi-isolated from the rest of the galaxy by working with Cerberus is not in issue (I think)  The problem is in the manner that it was accomplished.  Killing Shepard was just over-the-top unnecessary.  And the manner of his return makes my brain hurt.

If it had been explored in depth more, the hows and the whys of his return, possible consequences later on down the road, it might have been more acceptable.  Still unnecessary, but perhaps a good tale in its own right.  Death is a heavy topic.  The way ME2 used it was, imo, trivial

Modifié par iakus, 09 octobre 2011 - 05:55 .

[d1sciple]

so how would we get shep to follow TIM so blindly. what would have to happen, if death is too much?
we need shep to follow one of his greatest enemies and remember, we are restricted by time(it's only around a 30hr game) and also by the convo tree.
it's an awesome tool but it also places alot of restriction on the story as it's just not feasible to have too many opposite decisions every 2 seconds, we would quickly end up with a branch line consisting of infinite possibilities and zero story. so it has to be quite linear.

[Pro_Consul]

d1sciple wrote...

so how would we get shep to follow TIM so blindly. what would have to happen, if death is too much?

First, nothing in ME2 has Shep following TIM "blindly". Both Paragon and Renegade paths put Shep at odds with TIM at numerous points, and never fully trusting him. That said, here are just a few alternatives that jumped out at me for avoiding the trite death ploy:

1. Shepard suffers what should normally be permanently disabling injuries, so that after the first few months most people give up on him and the media starts treating him almost as if he were already dead, "tragically fallen in the line of duty". They also draw the wrong conclusions based on the fact that his injuries were sustained during a battle in Geth space, and so paint him as a heroic but tragic casualty fighting to protect the galaxy from the Geth scourge, playing right into the Council's spin that Reapers do not exist. Thus Shep's own predicament is used as a media tool to turn attention away from the real danger, which is particularly galling to Shep. TIM soon arranges for him to be "transferred" to another hospital and then snatches him in transit, uses his nano-thingummies on him and eventually restores him to full function, selling him on the idea that his restoration and his cooperation with Cerberus is the best way to jumpstart efforts to fight the real enemy that the Council is ignoring: the Reapers.

2. Shep is lost during a mission in Terminus space while pursuing his hunt for Reapers. Secretly glad to have Shep and his "fear mongering" Reaper talk out of the way, the Council go through the motions of attempting to find and rescue him, but really abandon him there. Once the Council ships have abandoned their half-hearted search, TIM mounts a real rescue mission and eventually recovers Shep. It turns out he has been surviving by hiding out in caves and gathering supplies by conducting one man hit and run raids on Batarian slavers who have been collecting human slaves, bringing them to a staging camp on this planet and selling them to Collectors, for reasons as yet completely unknown. TIM believes that this slaver activity is linked both to recent attacks by unknown forces against human colonies, and ultimately with the Reapers, and convinces Shep to cooperate in investigating this line of inquiry.

3. Simplest of all, the Council finally gets tired of Shep's "obsession" with "non-existent" Reapers and assigns him to some useless, boring out of the way duty to keep him out of sight of both themselves and the media. After several months of this TIM has agents quietly approach Shep and offer him a chance to get back into the fight against the Reapers, a chance Shep is willing to jump at despite his innate suspicions of anything to do with Cerberus. Perhaps the initial contact is even made by the familiar Dr. Chakwas, thus allaying some of Shep's natural concern that this might be nothing more than a trap to do away with an old adversary, i.e. himself. In any case, Shep agrees to a meeting with TIM at which TIM promises him a new ship, a new team that he can hand pick himself and "free hand" to seach for ways to fight the Reapers, on the condition that Shep accept a couple of Cerberus officers in his crew and that he begin by investigating the attacks on humans colonies, which the Alliance is more or less leaving to their own devices. 

Edit: and those are just the ones that jumped out at me. No doubt there are plenty of other plausible, probably better alternatives that I didn't think of, but which would be an immense improvement over the whole death plot device. And even if we must be stuck with the death plot, there seems to be nobody disputing that it could have been handled much, much better, particularly with regard to how the myriad NPCs in the game underreact to Shep's sudden resurrection.

Modifié par Pro_Consul, 09 octobre 2011 - 06:20 .

[d1sciple]

all of those options fail to include any actions taken by his friends, only the Council/Alliance.
no one, especially Liara regardless of whether or not she is your LI, would stand for any of those scenarios. being lost, or injured, or disgraced wouldn't stop any of them finding/helping/backing you, so all of your options have a massive, unaddressed flaw. not easy is it?

also blindly following TIM is the only way to put it as for some reason shep is now working with the bad guys, and not just any bad guys, bad guys he tried to destroy. there's almost no justification for it except that he is blinded by his ultimate mission enough to disregard that.

Modifié par d1sciple, 09 octobre 2011 - 09:46 .

[Pro_Consul]

d1sciple wrote...

all of those options fail to include any actions taken by his friends, only the Council/Alliance.
no one, especially Liara regardless of whether or not she is your LI, would stand for any of those scenarios. being lost, or injured, or disgraced wouldn't stop any of them finding/helping/backing you, so all of your options have a massive, unaddressed flaw. not easy is it?

You overstate this case pretty badly.

In case #1 we could easily explain that with Shep totally disabled and confined to a rehab hospital, that eventually most of his friends go on with their own lives and careers. Shep's love interest would be an obvious potential exception, but we could easily manage that by having Shep himself force some distance in that relationship out of fear of holding his LI back from going on with his/her life. We can also have Liara running afoul of the Shadow Broker in her efforts to find Shep after TIM disappears him/her from the rehab hospital, or perhaps have her oppose the Shadow Broker's efforts to snatch Shep for the Collectors, just as she did with his corpse in the actual game.

In case #2 it's even easier. Which of Shep's friends have the resources to conduct search and rescue operations in hostile space when they don't even have a ship? With both the Alliance and the Council turning a blind eye to Shep's fate, only TIM remains as a player with the resources to do anything about finding and rescuing Shep. And indeed we can explain Joker and Chakwas joining Cerberus as having been their way of continuing to try to find Shep, whereas the other friends could not overcome their antipathy to Cerberus to make such a "deal with the Devil", partly for fear that Shep himself would never approve of their joining Cerberus. And here you could still have Liara running afoul of the Shadow Broker in her efforts to help Cerberus rescue Shep before the Collectors can get to him.

In case #3 it's easiest of all. Which of Shep's friends would have the power to overrule the Council's decision to assign one of their Spectres to whatever task they saw fit? Arguably only the human councilor could do so, and only Anderson would want to. And he, of course, would be outvoted by the other three members of the Council. Unless of course the human Alliance had taken control of the Council, in which case again it is Alliance policy that will rule no matter what any or all of Shep's friends want. You could still have the side story of Liara running afoul of the Shadow Broker in her efforts to help Shep, except that now it would make even more sense.

Also, in all three cases Shep's decision to cooperate with Cerberus comes down to the same thing: they are the only ones around who have both the interest in fighting the Reapers and the resources to do anything useful in that pursuit.

d1sciple wrote...

also blindly following TIM is the only way to put it as for some reason shep is now working with the bad guys, and not just any bad guys, bad guys he tried to destroy. there's almost no justification for it except that he is blinded by his ultimate mission enough to disregard that.

Not at all. Blindly following TIM would mean that Shep accepts everything TIM tells him at face value, obeys all TIM's orders without question, and never asserts his ability to make any decisions for himself without TIM's approval. This is 100% NOT what Shep does in the game. There is no path you can choose in the game's decision trees that would amount to Shep blindly following TIM at all. Even where Shep agrees with something questionable that TIM has said or done, Shep always explains how it agrees with his own methods and/or positions about the issue in question. There is never a single case of Shep blindly acceding to a single thing TIM does.

[d1sciple]

i think you've taken generalizations too seriously and gone crazy with them.

sheps following and 'joining' Cerberus is blind because to do so he has to stop his personal war against them, with no more info than 'we are the only ones fighting the real threat, the Reapers' speech by mister voice like puppies and orgasms himself, when in actual fact they were fighting the Collectors, not the Reapers. so blind on 2 counts, as in failing to stand up for his own morals and not accept anything TIM says and also letting TIM shift his focus from Reapers to Collectors.
all war-time leaders do it. 'we're fighting the bad guy, so we need you to sacrifice for the cause!'

as for your cases, they still don't stand up because again you've failed to highlight the personal plight of sheps comrades. shep has over 5 hardcore warriors absolutely dedicated to him. you can't possibly explain that away with 'oh they got bored after a couple of years' or 'they didn't have the resources'.
as we know from ME2 without shep at all Garrus setup a Paladin team, Tali is a commander, Liara is a mega rich info trader, Wrex is king of all the Krogan etc. i don't think getting bored or not having resources explains these incredible people away. they followed shep into the abyss, they would never ditch him. so we needed some way to force them to stop contact for 2 years, all these different people with different perspectives and personalities. because of that difference writing a convincing scenario is reaqlly, really ****in hard.

Modifié par d1sciple, 10 octobre 2011 - 05:31 .

[Pro_Consul]

d1sciple wrote...

i think you've taken generalizations too seriously and gone crazy with them.

sheps following and 'joining' Cerberus is blind because to do so he has to stop his personal war against them, with no more info than 'we are the only ones fighting the real threat, the Reapers' speech by mister voice like puppies and orgasms himself, when in actual fact they were fighting the Collectors, not the Reapers. so blind on 2 counts, as in failing to stand up for his own morals and not accept anything TIM says and also letting TIM shift his focus from Reapers to Collectors.
all war-time leaders do it. 'we're fighting the bad guy, so we need you to sacrifice for the cause!'

Umm....no. You are grossly misusing the term "blind" here. I don't know if its a language barrier thing, but to blindly follow someone means to cease using your own senses and reason and accept whatever they say or propose without question. There is absolutely no way you can make a case that Shep does THAT. Shep's possible in-game responses to TIM range from grudging agreement to flat out, in-your-face refusal. Never, and I mean NEVER in the game does Shep "blindly" accept anything TIM says or proposes, no matter how you play out the decision trees.

Also, there is no "shifting" of focus from Reapers to Collectors. They are the same enemy!!! The Collectors are merely tools which the Reapers use to do their dirty work without directly involving themselves. As the Collectors are executing the orders of the Reapers, are indeed soldiers OF the Reapers, and more, the Collectors are the only Reaper agents that Shep can actually reach to fight against, it naturally follows that they would be the focus of the struggle. If there were an actual Reaper running about, and Shep knew about it, that would be different. But right now, in ME2 time, the Collectors are the only Reaper action Shep knows about or can do anything about. Remember that according to ME1 lore, Shep believes he killed the only
Reaper in the galaxy and that all the other Reapers are still trapped in
dark space. So, would you think it more logical for Shep to conduct his fight against the Reapers by ignoring the depredations of the Reaper agents he knows about while haring off all over the galaxy cluelessly searching for an actual Reaper to fight, when he doesn't even know there IS another Reaper anywhere in the galaxy at the moment? Not a chance. Conrad Verner might choose that strategy, but Shep never would.

as for your cases, they still don't stand up because again you've failed to highlight the personal plight of sheps comrades. shep has over 5 hardcore warriors absolutely dedicated to him. you can't possibly explain that away with 'oh they got bored after a couple of years' or 'they didn't have the resources'.
as we know from ME2 without shep at all Garrus setup a Paladin team, Tali is a commander, Liara is a mega rich info trader, Wrex is king of all the Krogan etc. i don't think getting bored or not having resources explains these incredible people away. they followed shep into the abyss, they would never ditch him. so we needed some way to force them to stop contact for 2 years,

Umm...no again. I have fleshed them out quite as well as the actual ME2 writing team did with theirs. Better in fact, since my versions do not have those comrades blithely ignoring the fact of Shepard's resurrection from death. In all three of my scenarios, Shep is removed from the struggle in a manner beyond the ability of his comrades to change, just as in the death scenario. But in my scenarios, the comrades' reactions to Shep's return would be FAR more realistic, since returning from being stranded, crippled or sidelined is far, FAR easier to accept than returning from DEATH.

all these different people with different perspectives and personalities. because of that difference writing a convincing scenario is reaqlly, really ****in hard.

Not nearly as hard as you portray. And I believe I have demonstrated that however "hard" the overall task may be, it is not at all hard to come up with something better than the hackneyed death ploy they dumped on us. You have already more or less agreed that the OP's original point was valid, but it appears as if you are now backpedaling to say that they did the best anyone possibly could do when they chose the death scenario. Am I misunderstanding you, or was I misunderstanding you earlier when I thought you agreed with the OP more or less?

[d1sciple]

lol, you're still missing a decent story line.
none of your scenarios included anything to do with sheps comrades, and i challenge you to highlight where you specifically pointed out how each of your scenarios would affect the 5 major ME1 team members, each of which has a completely different personality to the next. you didn't lol, you just mentioned them in passing.

also your definition of blind fits exactly-cease using your own senses and reason and accept whatever they say or propose without question. uh, so shep wakes up and thats it, he's basically Cerberus. sounds like a perfect match to me.

as for the Collectors being the same enemy you are 100% percent wrong. the Collectors are not the Reapers, just tools for them, that's like stating that a war on the Geth would be a war on the Reapers, when we know that's wrong. the point of ME2 is TIM, not the Reapers.

[BentOrgy]

While its true that Shep can complain and moan about it, are we (The player.) ever given the ability to actually stop working for them? Sure, once, at the end of the story, by which time such a choice becomes almost moot, because its well... At the END. So can we blame Shep entirely? Perhaps not, but we can sure blame Bioware for shoehorning us into a situation where we are given no alternative. Ironic, in a game about choices. Like Horizon, ick.

And I'd call it a shift; sure, the Collector's might be the Reaper's little henchmen, but the Reaper's themselves hardly exist in the story proper at all. Bioware name drops them a few times throughout the story, seemingly to remind us "Oh yeah, they're still around." But otherwise, their presence is severely mitigated. Yes, its true that the Collector's were the immediate threat, I'm not saying we should have ignored them, but rather that Bioware should have balanced their role in the story to begin with, rather than making the game revolve around them.

I could overlook a new enemy stealing the spotlight from the MAIN antagonist, if their story held any weight; the Collector's story however, fails miserably to do so; their whole arc hinges on them stealing humans from colonies, and taking them back to make Reaper goo for a new Reaper Baby. The fact that they were once Protheans flies by so fast, its like it was a minor point, there was no meeting afterwards, no announcement, no cutscene, nothing, just; "My God, the Protheans weren't wiped out, they're just working for the Reapers now." and then.... "Pew pew pew!"

And in the end, I only have this to say about "Team Shepard" and their reaction to Shep's resurrection voodoo; crap. The only ones who really felt realistic were the two Virmire Survivors, and that in itself is sad, considering that entire scene was poorly directed and grossly contrived. All the others however were like, "O-M-G Sheptards! Youz back n' stuff! W00t!"

Modifié par BentOrgy, 10 octobre 2011 - 08:09 .

[008Zulu]

Miranda did sneak in a mind control chip, its what prevented you from telling Tim to cram it with walnuts the first second you see him. Near the end, Miranda realizes she was wrong to do so and sends a little WiFi signal to turn it off.

I'd like to hear (the official) how they got around the whole irreversible brain damage after more than 6 minutes without oxygen. I bet Shep has a cybernetic brain that has been programmed in (glaring memory holes notwithstanding) great detail.

[BentOrgy]

008Zulu wrote...

Miranda did sneak in a mind control chip, its what prevented you from telling Tim to cram it with walnuts the first second you see him. Near the end, Miranda realizes she was wrong to do so and sends a little WiFi signal to turn it off.

I'd like to hear (the official) how they got around the whole irreversible brain damage after more than 6 minutes without oxygen. I bet Shep has a cybernetic brain that has been programmed in (glaring memory holes notwithstanding) great detail.

Sneaky woman, not enough having half the of ME's players by the noodle, but she had to take their brains too?!

But seriously (Or... Serious-er) I wouldn't mind an answer myself, considering I don't think they have one. But a cybernetic brain could account for the severe lack of indoctrination following Shepard; the sap's been chest deep in Reaper tech over and over, and not once had a "Durr, Reapers good," moment.

[Pro_Consul]

d1sciple wrote...

lol, you're still missing a decent story line.
none of your scenarios included anything to do with sheps comrades, and i challenge you to highlight where you specifically pointed out how each of your scenarios would affect the 5 major ME1 team members, each of which has a completely different personality to the next. you didn't lol, you just mentioned them in passing.

And the actual game did more?!? My scenarios fit the existing actions of the comrades, so I don't need to repeat their interim backstories all over again. I thought that was clear, but reading back I see I failed to be explicit about it. Sorry. In any case, in all three of my scenarios Wrex would still return to Tuchanka, Garrus would still go vigilante commando, Liara would still get sideways with the Shadow Broker while trying to help Shep on the sly, Kaidan/Ashley would still ditch the Council to stick with their Alliance military careers and get reassigned to Horizon...and so on. The only things in their situations which would change was how/if they were seen in the alternate intro movie and that their reactions to Shep's return would be a LOT more realistic, since they would not be reacting to a resurrection from Death.

d1sciple wrote...also your definition of blind fits exactly-cease using your own senses and reason and accept whatever they say or propose without question. uh, so shep wakes up and thats it, he's basically Cerberus. sounds like a perfect match to me.

Ummm....no. Did you even play the game? Ever see the Paragon ending, where Shep basically tells TIM that from now on he, Shep, is calling the shots and TIM can either get in line with that or get lost? Ever see the post-Horizon conversation where Shep tells TIM (paraphrasing), "You are only as good as the information you can provide. If I can't trust the intel you give me, then you are no use to me." That is diametrically the OPPOSITE of someone blindly following someone else.

As Orgy just said, what you are really complaining about is Bioware forcing you, the player, to follow a certain course, not Shep blindly following TIM. Don't confuse problems in game design for problems with the story. Sometimes they are related, but they aren't the same thing. There have been numerous threads that have dealt with the complaint that the player is forced willy-nilly to cooperate, however grudgingly, with Cerberus. Your complaint belongs there, and it in no way equates to Shep "blindly" following anyone.

d1sciple wrote...as for the Collectors being the same enemy you are 100% percent wrong. the Collectors are not the Reapers, just tools for them, that's like stating that a war on the Geth would be a war on the Reapers, when we know that's wrong. the point of ME2 is TIM, not the Reapers.

Again, you are railing against a game design issue, not a matter of Shep blindly doing anything. BW brought in the Collectors because they thought they couldn't very well have another Reaper pop on the scene so soon after telling us that Sovvie was the only one around. But as the story is written, the Collectors and the Reapers ARE 100% the same enemy. If you were a soldier in battle would you sit in your tent playing poker as enemy soldiers attacked your lines, on the basis that your war was against their political leaders or against the nation with which they were allied or some other tripe like that? Heck no! You fight the enemy in front of you, you resist enemy action taken against your side. And in the case of ME2 the only enemy action that Shep can detect is the depredations of the Collectors, ergo the Collectors are where his attention gets focused.

There are already plenty of threads that deal with the complaint that the Collectors should never have been introduced as a plot element, and your complaint belongs in one of those threads, not in this one.

Modifié par Pro_Consul, 10 octobre 2011 - 05:25 .

[008Zulu]

BentOrgy wrote...
But seriously (Or... Serious-er) I wouldn't mind an answer myself, considering I don't think they have one. But a cybernetic brain could account for the severe lack of indoctrination following Shepard; the sap's been chest deep in Reaper tech over and over, and not once had a "Durr, Reapers good," moment.

Only two real possibilities; Cerberus had either an extremely detailed imprint of Shep's organic neural network (brain) or his brain was replaced by a hard drive. Rebuilding 15-33 billion neurons in the right patterns would be an unenviable task, even for computer controlled nanites.

Or, possibility number 3....

Shepard is like Fry from Futurama, whos brain lacks a certain waveform which makes him immune to mind control. Unfortunatly, this also makes him slightly denser than a block of lead.

[d1sciple]

my 'complaint' is not a complaint, where did that come from?
i think you're confusing things, the only complaint i've put forth is in response to your complaint that the story isn't good enough, i'm defending the story and some of the facts you dispute.
like the fact that ME2 is about the Collectors, not the Reapers, the fact that shep is blind(that's a major design and story point, without him acting like a blind douche there'd be no ME2) and the fact that there still hasn't been a workable alternative put forth yet.

so again, your story isn't good enough as you haven't put forth any believable scenarios concerning sheps comrades, you're just writing them off by saying they would end up doing what they do anyway. you're missing a reason for them to 'leave' him and that's why his death works.

if he disappeared at least half of them would scour the galaxy for him.
if he turned into a complete psycho at least half would still follow him.
if he got sick at least half would try to help.
if he was disgraced by the Council all of them would still follow.
the death scenario works because they knew he was gone, so there was no reason to continue the quest since no one else in the galaxy believes it. that said, one of his team members still can't leave it be and takes on a personal quest to find him.

[BentOrgy]

008Zulu wrote...

BentOrgy wrote...
But seriously (Or... Serious-er) I wouldn't mind an answer myself, considering I don't think they have one. But a cybernetic brain could account for the severe lack of indoctrination following Shepard; the sap's been chest deep in Reaper tech over and over, and not once had a "Durr, Reapers good," moment.

Only two real possibilities; Cerberus had either an extremely detailed imprint of Shep's organic neural network (brain) or his brain was replaced by a hard drive. Rebuilding 15-33 billion neurons in the right patterns would be an unenviable task, even for computer controlled nanites.

Or, possibility number 3....

Shepard is like Fry from Futurama, whos brain lacks a certain waveform which makes him immune to mind control. Unfortunatly, this also makes him slightly denser than a block of lead.

Or number four.... "Plot device Mr. Frodo, plot device."

But if they do have a reason; considering that there's little to no feasible reason why Cerberus would have an organic road map of Shep's brain, magically complete with memories and etc, an almost equally magical harddrive is the only option, unless Bioware's withholding some crrazy secret under Shep's domepiece, ala Futurama, which I sincerely hope isn't the case.

Its bad enough they've made humans out to be a sort of Matser Race, or at least putting them on the track to being one, I really don't need Shepard turning out to be some Cosmic Gandlaf or Space Jesus.

(And on a minor note: was I just completely ignored in the other debate? )

Modifié par BentOrgy, 10 octobre 2011 - 11:17 .

[Pro_Consul]

d1sciple wrote...

my 'complaint' is not a complaint, where did that come from?
i think you're confusing things, the only complaint i've put forth is in response to your complaint that the story isn't good enough, i'm defending the story and some of the facts you dispute.
like the fact that ME2 is about the Collectors, not the Reapers, the fact that shep is blind(that's a major design and story point, without him acting like a blind douche there'd be no ME2) and the fact that there still hasn't been a workable alternative put forth yet.

Huh? You "defend" the story by pointing out its shortcomings, e.g. Collectors and Shep being "blind"? You certainly weren't responding to any facts I disputed when you first raised those issues. You brought them up. I only disputed your erroneous use of the word "blindly" when describing how Shep gets along with TIM. And in any case, as I already pointed out, those issues are tangential, having nothing to do with Shep's death and how badly that plot device was or was not employed. But have it your way. If you want to think Shepard telling TIM where to get off is somehow an example of Shep blindly following TIM, quibbling over your misuse of the word is obviously not moving us forward.

d1sciple wrote...

so again, your story isn't good enough as you haven't put forth any believable scenarios concerning sheps comrades, you're just writing them off by saying they would end up doing what they do anyway. you're missing a reason for them to 'leave' him and that's why his death works.

Perhaps. And perhaps not. What I am NOT missing is a reason for them to react as they do when he returns. The actual game is missing that part, and I am showing how easy it would have been to come up with something that is more realistic and consistent in that area.

d1sciple wrote...

if he disappeared at least half of them would scour the galaxy for him.

How? In whose ship? They gonna just pool a few years salary each and charter a passenger ship to take them on a tour of hostile alien systems? If we posit that all of them put their lives on hold indefinitely in order to do what they could to scour the galaxy for Shep, then they would still be trying to put together the resources to START their search and rescue operation long after TIM had already found and rescued him.

d1sciple wrote...

if he was disgraced by the Council all of them would still follow.

Fine. Let them. That works, too. Or rather it works better than the death tripe they actual went with. See? Even you can you do better than they did! And it didn't look like you had to work all that hard to come up with a more realistic scenario than the death ploy.

d1sciple wrote...

the death scenario works because they knew he was gone, so there was no reason to continue the quest since no one else in the galaxy believes it. that said, one of his team members still can't leave it be and takes on a personal quest to find him.

Sigh. Let me try to explain this another way. You are defending the death scenario apparently on the sole basis that you think it is the only plausible way to explain why the former companions are not in the initial party when Shep starts running missions in a Cerberus ship. Please correct me if I am wrong on that. But to continue, however much the death scenario may explain away the removal of the ME1 companions, it totally makes a lame joke out of their reintroduction when they see Shep risen from the dead and not a single one of them so much as acknowledges that fact let alone reacts properly to it. Wrex is the closest one to giving an in-character response, but only because his character is so callous to begin with, which is of course part of his charm. So no matter how much the death scenario may work (which in my opinion isn't all that much) in explaining the interim actions of the companions, it utterly fails all consistency checks everywhere else. So in the end it still doesn't work.

My sole point in positing those alternatives was that in my opinion there are a lot of ways other than death that could have been employed which could have resulted in a lot more realistic and consistent story than what we ended up with. And I still believe you are wrong in trying to cling to the death scenario as the only way to explain the departure of the old companions. But in any case, it appears you are clinging to the one story element that you think worked as a way to justify a plot device that more or less failed in every other way. Am I misunderstanding you there?

[Pro_Consul]

BentOrgy wrote...

But if they do have a reason; considering that there's little to no feasible reason why Cerberus would have an organic road map of Shep's brain, magically complete with memories and etc, an almost equally magical harddrive is the only option, unless Bioware's withholding some crrazy secret under Shep's domepiece, ala Futurama, which I sincerely hope isn't the case.

I dunno. I always imagined them as having limped past this point with the pseudo-science that being frozen in vaccuum somehow would have preserved Shep's brain sufficiently to avoid decay. It's weak, but then again I'm rather glad they didn't even try to explain it. The lack of an explanation is much easier to swallow than an obviously bad explanation. Or at least it does better at not straining my ability to suspend disbelief. Honestly, if they tried to explain every scientific gap of this kind, it would be like trying to swim through a quicksand pool of pseudo-science. Yech.

[d1sciple]

i don't remember saying that the whole 'blind' follower shtick was a bad thing?
i don't think it's a shortcoming, it's an integral part of the basic heroes journey structure. the story is a classic heroes journey 101 so according to the established structure we need something so intense to happen to our hero that they forget their own quest and allow themselves to be manipulated by what we know to be the true antagonist. it's what makes this structure absolutely timeless. so that said again i have to defend the death scenario.

major parts of the story, i agree, aren't fulfilling at all. some of those are because they're based on junk logic, some of those are due to the restrictions of the game design, like the convo wheel and the story needing to be a linear trilogy etc.
i don't think they could've done alot more to the 'reunions' without compromising on the overall design, though in saying that we have to look at the Tali 'reunion', which i think was done perfectly.
it plays out over time, which is the best thing. when you first meet her again she's in disbelief, doesn't trust you and is pissed off. you help her out, she's still pissed, and she buggers off. then later on down the road you rescue her and save her mission and only then does she reluctantly join you, but that's not the end of it because then you have her trial.
it's a great piece, the best of all of them and it would've been good to see the others play out like that but i think they would've had to compromise the overall story. if we add the same structure as talis 'reunion' to the other 5 then we end up with a massive side story that really could've detracted from the main story, so instead of it being about our hero falling blindly under the control of the antagonist it would've been more about his explaining to everyone how his resurrection came about.

it may sound confusing but i'm not defending it all because i think it's above criticism. i love the game and because i love it i understand where it has gone wrong and most importantly why.

oh, and i had my own thread in regards to sheps resurrection. it seems not only is he completely intact, memories and all, he's also half robot, which is never explained at all. there's no mention of cybernetics(apart from biotic amps) in ME1 or any of the comics or books and then wham! sheps resurrected as the million dollar man and we're never given a reason as to why he doesn't have super strength, xray vision or even a T-100 skeleton.

[darkstarr_drgga]

There are a few things to consider when looking at this. Out of game, Shepards death serves as little more than a way for game developers to drive home that while the Mass Effect Trilogy is Shepards story, it is but a sliver of the overall universe. That by killing him, they are in a sense saying, "don't get to attached, because anyone can die at any moment." I think that ties into the whole aspect of choice and consequence in this game. Although, a bit rudimentary, this game at its inception serves to be taking baby steps towards a totally new dynamic type of game. One where, you can't be just good or bad and one where you are faced with those consequences of the choices you have made.

As for Shepard, he is the focal point. Which makes killing him the easiest way to shake things up and remind players that this is a different game with different rules. So, playing Mass Effect 2 you have to be conscious of that fact as you go into the suicide mission. It's likely that if you don't invest time in your group and do their side missions then they could die. Again, it goes back to choice. You could get out of this game with everyone, having lost some, or even having lost Shepard again. There's also the fact that Shepard becomes a plot point. There's this interest in him by the Collectors/Reapers, an interest that know doubt will be explained and revisited in Mass Effect 3.

As a writer, when it comes to story and the outside mechanics of this being a game, I view his death as just another plot point. While, I tend to not favor the killing off of characters just to bring them back (sort of gives things a less dramatic tone), I have to remind myself this is Sci-Fi. So it  is not out of the realm of possiblity, still there is the problem of psychological trauma. For me, in terms of story and character, I would envision whatever scars that are there, would manifest themselves down the line. You have to remember, Shepard's last memories before waking up in the Cerberus space station was saving his crew and being spaced. He was unconscious for two years, and when he woke he found himself in a life or death situation. Being a trained soldier, his training kicked in and he did what he had to do and found himself immediately put on course to fight the Collectors. As long as he can focus himself on the mission and saving the galaxy, I don't think those horrors or demons from his past will haunt him or really manifest themselves. That will comes when things settle down, and in those queit moments of reflection when he looks back and really takes account of what was lost. It will come when he is allowed to have perspective, because when your a soldier if you allow yourself such luxuries during the fight or mission, you won't last long. What kind of story would we have if Shepard allowed himself that?

Modifié par darkstarr_drgga, 11 octobre 2011 - 10:46 .

[Pro_Consul]

darkstarr_drgga wrote...

There are a few things to consider when looking at this. Out of game, Shepards death serves as little more than a way for game developers to drive home that while the Mass Effect Trilogy is Shepards story, it is but a sliver of the overall universe. That by killing him, they are in a sense saying, "don't get to attached, because anyone can die at any moment." I think that ties into the whole aspect of choice and consequence in this game. Although, a bit rudimentary, this game at its inception serves to be taking baby steps towards a totally new dynamic type of game. One where, you can't be just good or bad and one where you are faced with those consequences of the choices you have made.

That is by no means a new dynamic. It's been done numerous times by more than one game developer. And it's been BW's bread and butter since Baldur's Gate.

darkstarr_drgga wrote...

As for Shepard, he is the focal point. Which makes killing him the easiest way to shake things up and remind players that this is a different game with different rules. So, playing Mass Effect 2 you have to be conscious of that fact as you go into the suicide mission. It's likely that if you don't invest time in your group and do their side missions then they could die.

I don't see it as driving home the point that death can come for any character at any time. Rather I see as driving home the point that any death, no matter how it comes, does not necessarily have to have any consequences at all. Death is now trivial, since anyone can be brought back from it. Certainly every other character in the game seems to think the same, since not one of them does so much as a double-take at the sight of a resurrected Shep.

darkstarr_drgga wrote...

As a writer, when it comes to story and the outside mechanics of this being a game, I view his death as just another plot point. While, I tend to not favor the killing off of characters just to bring them back (sort of gives things a less dramatic tone), I have to remind myself this is Sci-Fi. So it  is not out of the realm of possiblity, still there is the problem of psychological trauma..... What kind of story would we have if Shepard allowed himself that?

Believable? Human? Those are the first two adjectives that come to mind, anyway. And the adjectives that come to mind when I think of the way resurrected Shepard is blithely received by all his old comrades are: trivialized, jarring and clumsy. But that's just my opinion, after all, so I can only hope for better in ME3. But it does make me wonder if Drew Karpyshyn was just mailing it in on this one so he could devote more time to his novels, because projects he really works on usually doesn't involve so many clumsy or trite plot devices, so many inconsistencies and are generally more original.

Modifié par Pro_Consul, 12 octobre 2011 - 02:03 .

[darkstarr_drgga]

[quote]Pro_Consul wrote...

That is by no means a new dynamic. It's been done numerous times by more than one game developer. And it's been BW's bread and butter since Baldur's Gate.[/quote]


So, what you are saying is that Mass Effect 2 is no more dynamic than Baldur's Gate?  Mass Effect is an evolution of that sort of gameplay. We've seen the games grow deeper and more involved from the Baldur's Gate series, through Neverwinter, onto Knights of the Old Republic, and so on. Point is, Mass Effect becomes more dynamic in the sense it opens game play up and makes you more accountable for your actions. One choice on a branch leads to another choice, so on and so forth until giving two people completely different gameplay experiences. As much as I love Baldur's Gate, it definitely wasn't dynamic. It was straight forward and no where near the complexity of todays games, as well it should be.

[quote]Pro_Consul wrote...

I don't see it as driving home the point that death can come for any
character at any time. Rather I see as driving home the point that any
death, no matter how it comes, does not necessarily have to have any
consequences at all. Death is now trivial, since anyone can be brought
back from it. Certainly every other character in the game seems to think
the same, since not one of them does so much as a double-take at the
sight of a resurrected Shep.[/quote]

Did you pay attention to the dialogue? Name a convo between Jacob and Shepard. It is stated how difficult it was to bring Shepard back and the amount of resource Cerberus spent to make it happen. This is not a process thats going to be duplicated. I will agree that the way it was handled left a little to be desired. That's squarely on the based on the limitations of the writing. The overal story is good, I like the concepts (though its a menagerie of already used and writte Sci-Fi plots and themes), but a lot of the interpersonal relationships and dialogue could be done much better and give the game a deeper feel. However, this is still a game. When I'm playing, I can recognize what the intent of certain choices are, and I'm okay giving way to a litte suspension of disbelief.[/quote]

[quote]dPro_Consul wrote...

Believable? Human? Those are the first two adjectives that come to mind,
anyway. And the adjectives that come to mind when I think of the way
resurrected Shepard is blithely received by all his old comrades are:
trivialized, jarring and clumsy. But that's just my opinion, after all,
so I can only hope for better in ME3. But it does make me wonder if Drew
Karpyshyn was just mailing it in on this one so he could devote more
time to his novels, because projects he really works on usually doesn't
involve so many clumsy or trite plot devices, so many inconsistencies
and are generally more original.
[/quote]

This is a Sci-Fi game... perhaps my expectations are lower than yours. Yet, to this day I don't think I have every played a game where the story and plot points flowed flawlessly. On a project like this I would imagine with so many peoples ideas, its hard to reconcile them into one cohesive piece. I'm sure a lot of the disjointedness comes from the creation process. In that case, you want cohesive? Go read some Asimov, Herbert, or any host of the Sci-Fi greats. Work written with a singular vision. 

However, there must be some redeeming quality here though, some kind of investment on your part. Something that brings you to this board to make posts such as the one you posted. I guess when it comes down to it, I understand the limitations. I can appreciate the fact that each Bioware game evolves. I think Shepard dying and coming back is an extremely minor detail, especially when your main antagonist is a race of sentient beings that have lived millions upon millions of years.