4309 réponses à ce sujet

[Golden Owl]

nitefyre410 wrote...



Having me  take an indoctrinated child away from the mother and to what needs to be  done before that child is fully indoctrinated.  Hell  you could with squadies but just don't hand  Shepard the idot  ball or give me another virmire.  Don't feed me stupid and tell me its ... DRAMMMA 

Oh dear god!........You have just found the one scenerio that would have me sacrificing squaddies left, right and centre to avoid...that scenerio would devastate me....

Modifié par Golden Owl, 16 octobre 2011 - 11:47 .

[Soul Cool]

iakus wrote...
Sometimes.  But sometimes all the choices are bad, and you have to pick what you personally consider the "least bad"  Such as the ending for DAO.  Those, I think make for better stories.  At least as far as computer games go, where you as the protagonist have at least a little control.

That's acceptable, but not really optimal in my opinion. So, I'm just going to have to agree to disagree here.

jeweledleah wrote...
except isn't it what you want as qwell? 
YOUR perfect story?  you just refuse to acept that your perfect story
can actualy coexist with OUR perfect story.

First, my perfect story would involve humanity enslaving the Reapers to conquer the galaxy for them, followed by systematic eradication of every other race in the galaxy. Then, of course, we'd have to destroy the Reapers. Just to be sure. So, no, my perfect story would most likely not be able to exist with yours.

Secondly, I do not think any situation that I am aware of can exist where you must both be forced to do something that you do not like (sacrifice a companion) and not do something that you do not like (sacrifice a companion). They are mutually exclusive.

Thirdly, I am not of the opinion that personal/squad sacrifice is a necessity or even an optimal method. Just that forcing the players to compromise on their ability to do as they please can be very effective in getting a point across.

Modifié par Soul Cool, 16 octobre 2011 - 11:44 .

[crimzontearz]

jeweledleah wrote...

Soul Cool wrote...

kylecouch wrote...
Nor I or anyeone else is asking for a "perfect" ending. We simpley think a "happy" ending should be POSSIBLE. if we think its worth it we will sacrifice a companion, but to force it upon us removes that choice, which is what the game boils down to.

Sometimes you don't get a choice to do things your way. That really is a "I want it to be my perfect story" objection.

except isn't it what you want as qwell?  YOUR perfect story?  you just refuse to acept that your perfect story can actualy coexist with OUR perfect story.

no, HIS perfect story involves the IMPOSITION of an outcome without an alternative otherwise, in his mind, his outcome of choice means nothing. Also.......perfect in the sense of entertainment value not "objective real world goals" (like save as many people as possible)

[TheRevanchist]

Soul Cool wrote...

kylecouch wrote...
Nor I or anyeone else is asking for a "perfect" ending. We simpley think a "happy" ending should be POSSIBLE. if we think its worth it we will sacrifice a companion, but to force it upon us removes that choice, which is what the game boils down to.

Sometimes you don't get a choice to do things your way. That really is a "I want it to be my perfect story" objection.

its a game based on choices. it is not real life where you have no control. Both endings can co exsist...if you lack the willpower to kill your companions when given the choice and must therefor have it forced upon you in order to have someone die then thats your problem...and I should not have to have my gameplay experience suffer for it when I payed just as much as you did...more possibly if you dont have CE.

[Soul Cool]

crimzontearz wrote...
no, HIS perfect story involves the IMPOSITION of an outcome without an alternative otherwise, in his mind, his outcome of choice means nothing. Also.......perfect in the sense of entertainment value not "objective real world goals" (like save as many people as possible)

That is not my perfect story. Please stop trying to be witty or a mind-reader. It is not working.

[TheRevanchist]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

kylecouch wrote...
 Showing a burning planet means a hell of a lot more then garrus being blown to bits. Seeing innocent, defenceless people dieing of starvation and disease is far more tragic then Tali falling to her death. Watching a Reaper obliterate thousands of people at a time is far more impactful then Ashley being left behind.

To you, maybe. Personally, I feel more attatched to the squadmates that have been with me for three games than a bunch of nameless civilians. It would affect me a lot more if Garrus or Tali got blown up than if the Earth did. It may not be the best analogy, but it's the same way you feel more sad when a family member dies than you do about a terrorist attack.

Except that I don't...don't presume everyone feels that way.

[Soul Cool]

kylecouch wrote...
its a game based on choices.

Then why cannot I have my own choices affect the game? Nothing that I actually want to do will happen because it is beyond the scope of the game. You are effectively arguing that I want to limit the scope of the game in a way that is fundamentally opposed to what I actually want from this game. Something that I will not get. Please, stop trying to be witty or a mind-reader. It is not working.

kylecouch wrote...
it is not real life where you have no control.

But it is attempting to tell a story, a story over which your control is actually miniscule.

kylecouch wrote...
Both endings can co exsist...if you lack the willpower to kill your companions when given the choice and must therefor have it forced upon you in order to have someone die then thats your problem...

I would have no problem killing any of my squadmates to ensure the optimal outcome for me.

kylecouch wrote...
and I should not have to have my gameplay experience suffer for it when I payed just as much as you did...more possibly if you dont have CE.

"I payed more money, I am more important." Some classic class warfare you have going on there.

[crimzontearz]

Soul Cool wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
no, HIS perfect story involves the IMPOSITION of an outcome without an alternative otherwise, in his mind, his outcome of choice means nothing. Also.......perfect in the sense of entertainment value not "objective real world goals" (like save as many people as possible)

That is not my perfect story. Please stop trying to be witty or a mind-reader. It is not working.

please stop trying to act cool or mature or superior....it's A: over rated, B rather silly. Simply because YOU seem to prefer a certain kind of entertainment that is arguably more realistic than the kind of entertainment someone else likes that does not make you "better" or more "mature" than others in any way shape or form. 

truth is, if you cared only about the outcome then the means to such outcomes would not matter. Thus the existence of a different, less bittersweet, outcome for the pleasure of other palates should not influence your enjoyment of the outcome YOU consider more satisfying. But since the very existence of an alternative (or third option) seems to turn other oucomes into sullied goods, to you, then what must matter is the very imposition of the outcome (like the "sadistic choice" scenario).

Hopefully Bioware will keep doing things the way they have and offer options to people especially when it comes to the ending.

[Golden Owl]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

kylecouch wrote...
 Showing a burning planet means a hell of a lot more then garrus being blown to bits. Seeing innocent, defenceless people dieing of starvation and disease is far more tragic then Tali falling to her death. Watching a Reaper obliterate thousands of people at a time is far more impactful then Ashley being left behind.

To you, maybe. Personally, I feel more attatched to the squadmates that have been with me for three games than a bunch of nameless civilians. It would affect me a lot more if Garrus or Tali got blown up than if the Earth did. It may not be the best analogy, but it's the same way you feel more sad when a family member dies than you do about a terrorist attack.

Except that I don't...don't presume everyone feels that way.

So you feel more depressed when you hear about some people getting blown up in the Middle East than if a parent or sibling was to die? Given how often the former event happens, you must permanently be in a severe state of deep depression.

It's more a matter often of how people die....If my Grandmother were to
die peacefully in her sleep on the same day that 20-30 children are
blown sky high in school in somewhere in the middle of
nowhere-o-stan....I am going to be hit a lot harder by the deaths of
those children than I am by grannies peaceful parting.

Modifié par Golden Owl, 16 octobre 2011 - 11:58 .

[Soul Cool]

crimzontearz wrote...
please stop trying to act cool or mature or superior....it's A: over rated, B rather silly. Simply because YOU seem to prefer a certain kind of entertainment that is arguably more realistic than the kind of entertainment someone else likes that does not make you "better" or more "mature" than others in any way shape or form.

I am not trying to be any of those things. It is you, once again assuming that I am attempting to place myself in a situation where I am superior to you. I am not. It is seriously insulting that you continually attempt to rationalize talking down to another person simply because you cannot imagine an honest person on the Internet attempting to have a genuine discourse on a subject that they are curious about. I only ask for a modicum of integrity and decorum when addressing my points. Whether or not you respect my position is entirely up to you.

crimzontearz wrote...
truth is, if you cared only about the outcome then the means to such outcomes would not matter.

I don't. I'm just talking about it because the conversation looks intersting. I have already stated several times in this very thread that my perfect story will obviously not be happening. I am fine with that. I am also fine with people wanting their perfect story to take place. I am simply attempting to find a more optimal solution to communicate the story to the player without seriously compromising on my ability to connect with the world of the game.

crimzontearz wrote...
Thus the existence of a different, less bittersweet, outcome for the pleasure of other palates should not influence your enjoyment of the outcome YOU consider more satisfying.

The outcome I consider most satisfying is not possible. How do you reconcile this with what you say?

crimzontearz wrote...
But since the very existence of an alternative (or third option) seems to turn other oucomes into sullied goods, to you, then what must matter is the very imposition of the outcome (like the "sadistic choice" scenario).

That is not what I have argued at all. Re-read what I have said. (There is, after all, only page 102 and page 103 to read of me being serious in this thread.) You will probably find it most enlightining, and make you much less antagonistic toward my viewpoint.

crimzontearz wrote...
Hopefully Bioware will keep doing things the way they have and offer options to people especially when it comes to the ending.

More choice can be better.

[nitefyre410]

Golden Owl wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...



Having me  take an indoctrinated child away from the mother and to what needs to be  done before that child is fully indoctrinated.  Hell  you could with squadies but just don't hand  Shepard the idot  ball or give me another virmire.  Don't feed me stupid and tell me its ... DRAMMMA 

Oh dear god!........You have just found the one scenerio that would have me sacrificing squaddies left, right and centre to avoid...that scenerio would devastate me....

 

yes such simple scenerio and i just demonstrated the absolute horror that the reapers bring.  See where  Bioware fails at  dispite all their prowess as story tellers is they don't follow the rule of "Show me don't tell me"  and there where I believe the emotional disconnect is at. 

[TheRevanchist]

Soul Cool wrote...

kylecouch wrote...
its a game based on choices.

Then why cannot I have my own choices affect the game? Nothing that I actually want to do will happen because it is beyond the scope of the game. You are effectively arguing that I want to limit the scope of the game in a way that is fundamentally opposed to what I actually want from this game. Something that I will not get. Please, stop trying to be witty or a mind-reader. It is not working.

kylecouch wrote...
it is not real life where you have no control.

But it is attempting to tell a story, a story over which your control is actually miniscule.

kylecouch wrote...
Both endings can co exsist...if you lack the willpower to kill your companions when given the choice and must therefor have it forced upon you in order to have someone die then thats your problem...

I would have no problem killing any of my squadmates to ensure the optimal outcome for me.

kylecouch wrote...
and I should not have to have my gameplay experience suffer for it when I payed just as much as you did...more possibly if you dont have CE.

"I payed more money, I am more important." Some classic class warfare you have going on there.

"class warfare" huh? no not really...I simply paid for it...like you did, I should therefor get everything I want as well as what you want...since we both paid for it.

And Bioware games are typically about people who change the world as they see fit, the world bends around them. so no...I would say you simpley want to reduce that player control to satisfy your taste for what you consider good, and to hell with any other opinion.

[Soul Cool]

kylecouch wrote...
"class warfare" huh? no not really...I simply paid for it...like you did

Then why bring up the point about buying the CE versus the regular version?

kylecouch wrote...
I should therefor get everything I want as well as what you want...since we both paid for it.

Everything I want would bankrupt EA.

kylecouch wrote...
And Bioware games are typically about people who change the world as they see fit, the world bends around them.

Please reconcile this with me not being able to achieve anything resembling what I want in-game.

kylecouch wrote...
so no...I would say you simpley want to reduce that player control to satisfy your taste for what you consider good, and to hell with any other opinion.

Not what I have said at all. It is you who has just said that is what I want.

[TheRevanchist]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

kylecouch wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

kylecouch wrote...
 Showing a burning planet means a hell of a lot more then garrus being blown to bits. Seeing innocent, defenceless people dieing of starvation and disease is far more tragic then Tali falling to her death. Watching a Reaper obliterate thousands of people at a time is far more impactful then Ashley being left behind.

To you, maybe. Personally, I feel more attatched to the squadmates that have been with me for three games than a bunch of nameless civilians. It would affect me a lot more if Garrus or Tali got blown up than if the Earth did. It may not be the best analogy, but it's the same way you feel more sad when a family member dies than you do about a terrorist attack.

Except that I don't...don't presume everyone feels that way.

So you feel more depressed when you hear about some people getting blown up in the Middle East than if a parent or sibling was to die? Given how often the former event happens, you must permanently be in a severe state of deep depression.

No...I simpley don't hold any single person, no matter who it is...over the well being of the masses. all those lives outweight that single life, weather I know them or not is irrelevent.

[TheRevanchist]

Soul Cool wrote...

kylecouch wrote...
"class warfare" huh? no not really...I simply paid for it...like you did

Then why bring up the point about buying the CE versus the regular version?

kylecouch wrote...
I should therefor get everything I want as well as what you want...since we both paid for it.

Everything I want would bankrupt EA.

kylecouch wrote...
And Bioware games are typically about people who change the world as they see fit, the world bends around them.

Please reconcile this with me not being able to achieve anything resembling what I want in-game.

kylecouch wrote...
so no...I would say you simpley want to reduce that player control to satisfy your taste for what you consider good, and to hell with any other opinion.

Not what I have said at all. It is you who has just said that is what I want.

indeed I did say that, and realize you have not and apologise for such.  

[Golden Owl]

nitefyre410 wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...



Having me  take an indoctrinated child away from the mother and to what needs to be  done before that child is fully indoctrinated.  Hell  you could with squadies but just don't hand  Shepard the idot  ball or give me another virmire.  Don't feed me stupid and tell me its ... DRAMMMA 

Oh dear god!........You have just found the one scenerio that would have me sacrificing squaddies left, right and centre to avoid...that scenerio would devastate me....

 

yes such simple scenerio and i just demonstrated the absolute horror that the reapers bring.  See where  Bioware fails at  dispite all their prowess as story tellers is they don't follow the rule of "Show me don't tell me"  and there where I believe the emotional disconnect is at. 

Yes and no....BW would do better for emotional impact with the 'show me don't tell me' though by the same token, they would then be walking a fine line...the how much is too much issue....I see a crowd of people running for their very lives, I'm gonna choke and hurt hard, tears rolling down the face, etc...Now show me children being dragged away screaming by husks and I can't save them.... I will probably drop the game as too emotionally hard to take.

[crimzontearz]

AND YET.......you should know that by "perfect outcome" people who are familiar with videogames in general, more specifically with Bioware games and story driven games based on choices, mean the one outcome that is the most entertaining to themwithin the boundries given to you. If you are a gamer who plays story driven games you should know that the "perfect outcome" does not equate to "rewrite the boundries given to you by the story tellers". Lovely argument on your part tho........too bad it is rather useless given thje context. Sure I would LOVE to be able to shoot Miranda and Jacob in the head and deliver the SR2 to the alliance, be reinstated and screw cerberus in ME2.....not happening tho right?

So once that is cleared the perfect outcome (and feel free to interpret it this way now when someone bring it up so we can stop wasting time) is the outcome that, within the range of outcomes given to you, suits your tastes best. Once you are given the chance to obtain the outcome that pleases you the most then the rest should not matter UNLESS what makes that outcome palatable to you is indeed the fact that it is imposed on you without an alternative. Which is the very fulcrum of EVERY discussion about this subject that we have had in this forum so far.

[Soul Cool]

kylecouch wrote...
indeed I did say that, and realize you have not and apologise for such.  

Thank you, though you don't have to apologize. This thread is very large, and it is easy to  misunderstand when someone new comes in to pick up on an old argument. No harm done. :happy:

[Soul Cool]

crimzontearz wrote...
AND YET.......you should know that by "perfect outcome" people who are familiar with videogames in general, more specifically with Bioware games and story driven games based on choices, mean the one outcome that is the most entertaining to themwithin the boundries given to you. If you are a gamer who plays story driven games you should know that the "perfect outcome" does not equate to "rewrite the boundries given to you by the story tellers". Lovely argument on your part tho........too bad it is rather useless given thje context. Sure I would LOVE to be able to shoot Miranda and Jacob in the head and deliver the SR2 to the alliance, be reinstated and screw cerberus in ME2.....not happening tho right?

It is very ironic that you are arguing against limitation in one point, and yet immediately reverse course when somoene who wants more ask for it. Now shall I continue in with "Reality isn't really all that important to me" and re-hash the entire argument you've just made except with me on the side you have been attempting to argue and you on the other? It would be most entertaining.

crimzontearz wrote...
So once that is cleared the perfect outcome (and feel free to interpret it this way now when someone bring it up so we can stop wasting time) is the outcome that, within the range of outcomes given to you, suits your tastes best. Once you are given the chance to obtain the outcome that pleases you the most then the rest should not matter UNLESS what makes that outcome palatable to you is indeed the fact that it is imposed on you without an alternative. Which is the very fulcrum of EVERY discussion about this subject that we have had in this forum so far.

This makes me wonder if there is a situation in which you can do everything right and still lose.

Modifié par Soul Cool, 17 octobre 2011 - 12:21 .

[CBGB]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

So if the fine folks at Bioware have squeezed in one little possible endgame scenario in which the crew makes it out alive again and I don't have to basically murder my space-BFFs to win, even if there's like a 10% chance of getting that ending, I'd be eternally grateful.  Too late to really impact the story at this point, sure, but if the tweets are to be believed, I'm going to spend half the game sobbing anyway, so is wanting to watch the credits roll with a stupid, satisfied grin on my face too much to ask?

Well said. I didn't feel the least bit cheated in ME2 by the chance to save everyone, and I hope for that possibility in ME3.

Death is often used as a cheap shorthand for risk, but sacrifice and loss come in many forms, as we've all learned from childhood on.  I cried when I read Old Yeller, but I also cried at the end of E.T., no death involved.

The depth of feeling from saying goodbye isn't measured by its darkness but by how much the other person has meant to us. Mass Effect has meant a lot to me, and I'd love for it to close with hope.

[nitefyre410]

Golden Owl wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...



Having me  take an indoctrinated child away from the mother and to what needs to be  done before that child is fully indoctrinated.  Hell  you could with squadies but just don't hand  Shepard the idot  ball or give me another virmire.  Don't feed me stupid and tell me its ... DRAMMMA 

Oh dear god!........You have just found the one scenerio that would have me sacrificing squaddies left, right and centre to avoid...that scenerio would devastate me....

 

yes such simple scenerio and i just demonstrated the absolute horror that the reapers bring.  See where  Bioware fails at  dispite all their prowess as story tellers is they don't follow the rule of "Show me don't tell me"  and there where I believe the emotional disconnect is at. 

Yes and no....BW would do better for emotional impact with the 'show me don't tell me' though by the same token, they would then be walking a fine line...the how much is too much issue....I see a crowd of people running for their very lives, I'm gonna choke and hurt hard, tears rolling down the face, etc...Now show me children being dragged away screaming by husks and I can't save them.... I will probably drop the game as too emotionally hard to take.

   


You're absolutely right there is a very fine line that is going  to be danced with... for the  record I  would go with the  first  scene and  not the second  because most can't handle  seeing something like that which is perfectly fine.   Pushing emotional buttons is good but pushing to much or too hard and you turn the reader/viewer/player off and they go  numb.   

Modifié par nitefyre410, 17 octobre 2011 - 12:28 .

[crimzontearz]

Soul Cool wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...
AND YET.......you should know that by "perfect outcome" people who are familiar with videogames in general, more specifically with Bioware games and story driven games based on choices, mean the one outcome that is the most entertaining to themwithin the boundries given to you. If you are a gamer who plays story driven games you should know that the "perfect outcome" does not equate to "rewrite the boundries given to you by the story tellers". Lovely argument on your part tho........too bad it is rather useless given thje context. Sure I would LOVE to be able to shoot Miranda and Jacob in the head and deliver the SR2 to the alliance, be reinstated and screw cerberus in ME2.....not happening tho right?

It is very ironic that you are arguing against limitation in one point, and yet immediately reverse course when somoene who wants more ask for it. Now shall I continue in with "Reality isn't really all that important to me" and re-hash the entire argument you've just made except with me on the side you have been attempting to argue and you on the other? It would be most entertaining.

crimzontearz wrote...
So once that is cleared the perfect outcome (and feel free to interpret it this way now when someone bring it up so we can stop wasting time) is the outcome that, within the range of outcomes given to you, suits your tastes best. Once you are given the chance to obtain the outcome that pleases you the most then the rest should not matter UNLESS what makes that outcome palatable to you is indeed the fact that it is imposed on you without an alternative. Which is the very fulcrum of EVERY discussion about this subject that we have had in this forum so far.

This makes me wonder if there is a situation in which you can do everything right and still lose.

uh.....because I have been a WoD storyteller since I was in my final high school years from 1997 on? Because I know that when you craft a story there NEED to be boundries or else the stories you craft fopr you players completely fall apart? Sure THOSE boundries are much much looser but they need to be there (hence the inside joke of the "slip-falls-dies" characters). Players and Storytellers strike a balance in order for the story to actually work and move forward otherwise sessions and chronicles get ruined

Storyteller: You find one of your ghouls tied in your master bedroom, torn to pieces. Her entrails are arranged on the floor in a ritualistic pattern and with her bodily fluids someone has written on the wall "I know your secret".....

Player: meh.......I never liked that ***** anyway. I kill the rest of my ghouls, freeze all my assets and go to torpor for 150 years............next............


seriously at this point you are being ridiculous if you consider the context of your argument



furthermore...depends on what you mean by "lose"

[Golden Owl]

nitefyre410 wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...

Golden Owl wrote...

nitefyre410 wrote...



Having me  take an indoctrinated child away from the mother and to what needs to be  done before that child is fully indoctrinated.  Hell  you could with squadies but just don't hand  Shepard the idot  ball or give me another virmire.  Don't feed me stupid and tell me its ... DRAMMMA 

Oh dear god!........You have just found the one scenerio that would have me sacrificing squaddies left, right and centre to avoid...that scenerio would devastate me....

 

yes such simple scenerio and i just demonstrated the absolute horror that the reapers bring.  See where  Bioware fails at  dispite all their prowess as story tellers is they don't follow the rule of "Show me don't tell me"  and there where I believe the emotional disconnect is at. 

Yes and no....BW would do better for emotional impact with the 'show me don't tell me' though by the same token, they would then be walking a fine line...the how much is too much issue....I see a crowd of people running for their very lives, I'm gonna choke and hurt hard, tears rolling down the face, etc...Now show me children being dragged away screaming by husks and I can't save them.... I will probably drop the game as too emotionally hard to take.

   


You're absolutely right there is a very fine line that is going  to be danced with... for the  record I  would go with the  first  scene and  not the second  because most can't handle  seeing something like that which is perfectly fine.   Pushing emotional buttons is good but pushing to much or too hard and you turn the reader/viewer/player off and they go  numb.   

You and I nitefrye are on the same wave length....

[nitefyre410]

Golden Owl wrote...
You and I nitefrye are on the same wave length....

  

you have to know your audience in the end and not try to force something into the story thats not supposed to be there.