4309 réponses à ce sujet

[CoffeeHolic93]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

However, they also have to factor in player choice and adequate reward for playing the game well.  They cannot force too many uncontrollable events on the player because then the game gets too railroady, and if playing the game well isn't rewarded, there's no reason for the player to come back again, try to do better, or explore content more deeply.

It's a delicate balancing act that screenplay writers and novelists don't have to worry about.

SPOILERS FOR DRAGON AGE 2

In DA2 Hawke controls absolutely nothing, and everything that happens affect him not the other way around. You can't prevent the death of your mom or one of your siblings and you will ALWAYS lose your second sibling (temporarily or permanently). It did a good job of making you feel helpless HOWEVER it felt like we had no choice in the matter.

/opinion

[AdmiralCheez]

Saphra Deden wrote...

I always get the IFF as soon as possible. I did that my very first run too. I lost the whole crew, including Chakwas. However I don't feel that's enough. The crew is not the squadmates. They have significantly less dialogue and screen time.

See, this is the problem.  You measure things, attach rules, develop formulas for what you consider accceptable.  You quantify things that aren't supposed to be quantified.  You're too detached.

Try feeling instead of analyzing, going with instinct instead of rules.  Become part of the experience instead of just observing it from afar.

It's the difference between looking at a painting and looking at a painting.

[AdmiralCheez]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Well what is "too many"? I don't think making the player choose one person to die is "too many". It fits the theme of the game well and has dramatic and emotional depth. It also requires that the player think carefully so that this sacrifice saves the most lives.

I'd actually be okay with one (or even two, provided they are well woven into the narrative) Virmire-esque situation(s).  It is the removal of choice for the sake of forcing a subjective concept of a "good" story that frustrates me.  Having an "everyone gets out alive" ending would just be a nice thing to have.

[AdmiralCheez]

Saphra Deden wrote...

What in the **** are you talking about?

A videogame is not a passive experience.  You're evaluating it as if it were a film.  Plus you were all "oh the crew dying didn't have much weight because they had less screentime," which is a rather odd attempt at putting a near-numerical value on dramatic impact based on something as silly as how many lines a character had.  Such quantification of death is disturbingly cold, and also over-simplified when one considers all other dramatic tools that can be ultilized to affect the player.

Storytelling--effective storytelling--is not a mathematical equation.  And in a game that relies on player agency for that story to be told, the player has to willingly involve himself in it.  You have to, you know, roleplay.  Don't just mold Shepard's actions; let Shepard's experiences mold you a little.

[AdmiralCheez]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Well it's crappy story telling, especially for the supposedly "dark" middle act of the trilogy.

I find the ending scene works a lot better when we open with Shepard solemnly standing over the coffins of his fallen comrade(s).

Again, analyzing it as a film, using imposed rules to judge value rather than personal experience.

See, when I play, I don't think to myself, "what would be the most artistically valid conclusion to this particular segment?" but rather "it's my responsibility to overcome this challenge; how do I do that?"  I accept the role the game wants me to play (that of Shepard), and instead of an audience member I become an actor.  Eventually, I get in the mindset that I am the thing I'm pretending to be, not to the point of delusion of course, but to the point where when I play I think of the Normandy as my ship, and her crew, my crew.  Shepard's mission is my mission, and on behalf of everything we're fighting for I can't fail.

My method of play is not necessarily more valid than yours, but in order to understand my points, you need to see it from that perspective.

[SandTrout]

Saphra Deden wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

My method of play is not necessarily more valid than yours, but in order to understand my points, you need to see it from that perspective.

Well your perspective sucks.

Somehow I'm not surprised...

[AdmiralCheez]

Saphra Deden wrote...

How else should I quantify it? I guess to you a random extra dying is the same as main character.

It shouldn't be quantified at all.  An effective dramatic moment depends on a myriad of different elements working together, none of which are actually outright required.  What events happen before and after?  What is the setting?  What mood is generated by artistic presentation (music, the shot itself--lighting, color, angle, etc)?  How do the characters involved react?  What subtleties in their voices and body language send emotional cues to the audience?

And even then, it's still a highly subjective experience.

You know the girl in the red dress in Schindler's List?

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

SandTrout wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

My method of play is not necessarily more valid than yours, but in order to understand my points, you need to see it from that perspective.

Well your perspective sucks.

Somehow I'm not surprised...

Cheez: Well thought out post.
Saphra: D*ckish response.

Yep everything's normal around here.

[CoffeeHolic93]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Well your perspective sucks.

And we might feel the same way about your perspective.  No need to insult anyone for not having the same opinion as you do - Keep it civil.

[Grand Admiral Cheesecake]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Grand Admiral Cheesecake wrote...

Cheez: Rambling crap.
Saphra: D*ckish response.

Yep everything's normal around here.

Indeed.

[AdmiralCheez]

Saphra Deden wrote...

Yes it should. This is a work of fiction created for the enjoyment of an audience after all. If we can't subjectively quanitfy things then we can't criticize it.

But "subjective" and "quantify" should never go together.  The best you can do is count the number of people that felt a certain way at a given moment, or compare it to similar moments in other works of fiction.  A story cannot objectively be "bad" or "good," just perceived as bad or good by the people experiencing it.  When you say "X sucked," that's your opinion.  When you say why X sucked, those are the reasons why you came to your opinion, but still, it's only your opinion.  The work really only suffers if the majority react poorly to it, and even then it can be kept alive if the minority feel strongly enough about it.

When I point out how I feel the story fails this is how I look it. I don't see how there is anything wrong with that.

There isn't, but it's just how you feel.  You, personally.  You are not looking at it from any other angle besides your own.  And unfortunately, you are not looking at it from an angle appropriate for its medium.

The story works for you as it is, fine. I get that, I got that a long time ago. The way you enjoy things is great for you but it doesn't work for me.

And I'm presenting my point of view in hopes that you will try it out and get more enjoyment out of the experience.  Mass Effect 2, from a player-detatched standpoint, isn't incredibly engaging.  However, when the player is fully involved in the narrative as opposed to a passive observer, it shows a lot more depth.  Granted, this was only my experience, but I still think you should try it.

[fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb]

Ah Cheez and Deden are at it again *grabs popcorn*.

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

I always get the IFF as soon as possible. I did that my very first run too. I lost the whole crew, including Chakwas. However I don't feel that's enough. The crew is not the squadmates. They have significantly less dialogue and screen time.

See, this is the problem.  You measure things, attach rules, develop formulas for what you consider accceptable.  You quantify things that aren't supposed to be quantified.  You're too detached.

Try feeling instead of analyzing, going with instinct instead of rules.  Become part of the experience instead of just observing it from afar.

It's the difference between looking at a painting and looking at a painting.

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

No
really, you think? Orchestrating the drama is the job of the
development team. If I'm the one responsible for creating the drama in
the game then I better start getting paychecks.

However,
they also have to factor in player choice and adequate reward for
playing the game well.  They cannot force too many uncontrollable events
on the player because then the game gets too railroady, and if playing
the game well isn't rewarded, there's no reason for the player to come
back again, try to do better, or explore content more deeply.

It's a delicate balancing act that screenplay writers and novelists don't have to worry about.

I get what you mean the first two paragraphs(bolding or pronouncing same words different never works for me), except Mass Effect makes that exceptionally hard. I often listen through all dialogue options to decide because the "paraphrase" is extremely bad at indicating what's about to be said and/or Shephard says some extremly bad lines and I have to choose the lesser of the evils. Paragon and Renegade interrups aren't always predictable. It is indeed more like a film where you're directing because it doesn't feel very organic and who dies and lives feels more like an active decision than a reward. It's not based on chance or performance. An exception is the suicide mission choices but again its very railroaded the chosen few have no chance of failing and the ones outside of that have no chance of suceeding and I along with many others disagree with some of bioware's decisions. Something like how Kal Reegar dies or in combination with it would have been more apprpriate. (although I heard that's rather difficult to happen).

Something rewarding would be like having the choice to save both Ash and Kaiden, but it must be extremely extremely difficult with the chance of losing them both and for that reason highly recommended against as a good tactical decision.

p.s. remember the legendary debate/quarrel over SIdonis? A good example of why "what would be the most artistically valid conclusion to this particular segment?" mindset kicks in- I wanted sidonis to live but the fact that shepard tries to save him before hearing anything  (along with the merc massacre) seems to make it far too "artistically wrong"

Modifié par fdgvdddvdfdfbdfb, 17 octobre 2011 - 09:16 .