4309 réponses à ce sujet

[Killjoy Cutter]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Although, there is something I have to wonder. If your problem with saving everyone is that it's unrealistic, wouldn't it imply that Shepard is unrealistically skilled in the way s/he saves everyone? So thus, not doing everything and not saving everyone would turn out to be more realistic, in both actions and outcome.

Skill has nothing to do with anything.
As I said before, commandos die just as often as regular grunts (if not more) and they are the most skilled fighters in any army.

Shep should be able to save SOME party memebrs...or people in general. If he's realisticly in position to do so.

How many members of the team that killed bin Laden died on that mission?

[CptBomBom00]

so confused.

[Lotion Soronarr]

Xilizhra wrote...

Skill has nothing to do with anything.
As I said before, commandos die just as often as regular grunts (if not more) and they are the most skilled fighters in any army.

Shep should be able to save SOME party memebrs...or people in general. If he's realisticly in position to do so.

So if you feel that the position from which Shepard can save someone is unrealistic, don't take it. Simple.

So I want to RP a smart, caring Shepard who tries to save everyone he can....and yet I can't because he has to deliberately sabotage himself?

[Lotion Soronarr]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Although, there is something I have to wonder. If your problem with saving everyone is that it's unrealistic, wouldn't it imply that Shepard is unrealistically skilled in the way s/he saves everyone? So thus, not doing everything and not saving everyone would turn out to be more realistic, in both actions and outcome.

Skill has nothing to do with anything.
As I said before, commandos die just as often as regular grunts (if not more) and they are the most skilled fighters in any army.

Shep should be able to save SOME party memebrs...or people in general. If he's realisticly in position to do so.

How many members of the team that killed bin Laden died on that mission?

That specific mision? None. How many Spec Ops team got trough an entire war campaign without casualties? None.

Oh, let's not forget that that same team died in a helicopter accident later. Not even in battle.

And le'ts also not forget that we're talking about soldiers with the best equipment and intel available going against a few guys with AK-47... not machine-cthulus and their army of advanced combat drones and brainwashed slaves.

[Someone With Mass]

Xilizhra wrote...

Skill has nothing to do with anything.
As I said before, commandos die just as often as regular grunts (if not more) and they are the most skilled fighters in any army.

Shep should be able to save SOME party memebrs...or people in general. If he's realisticly in position to do so.

So if you feel that the position from which Shepard can save someone is unrealistic, don't take it. Simple.

This.

If it's not your thing, nobody's forcing you to use it.

[Xilizhra]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Skill has nothing to do with anything.
As I said before, commandos die just as often as regular grunts (if not more) and they are the most skilled fighters in any army.

Shep should be able to save SOME party memebrs...or people in general. If he's realisticly in position to do so.

So if you feel that the position from which Shepard can save someone is unrealistic, don't take it. Simple.

So I want to RP a smart, caring Shepard who tries to save everyone he can....and yet I can't because he has to deliberately sabotage himself?

No, he just won't be so unrealistically skilled that he'll be able to get everything done and save everyone, which by your logic no one is.

[CptBomBom00]

see what makes me confused..

[Il Divo]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

So I want to RP a smart, caring Shepard who tries to save everyone he can....and yet I can't because he has to deliberately sabotage himself?

And that's exactly the problem. The optional squad deaths doesn't allow this. If someone dies, it's because my Shepard didn't accurately assess the situation, not because the death was out of his hands.

[wildannie]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Skill has nothing to do with anything.
As I said before, commandos die just as often as regular grunts (if not more) and they are the most skilled fighters in any army.

Shep should be able to save SOME party memebrs...or people in general. If he's realisticly in position to do so.

So if you feel that the position from which Shepard can save someone is unrealistic, don't take it. Simple.

So I want to RP a smart, caring Shepard who tries to save everyone he can....and yet I can't because he has to deliberately sabotage himself?

I think this is the crux of your selfish argument Soronar,  you don't want your caring smart shepard to have to make a wrong choice.  You have no idea what these kind of choices might be, there doesn't have to be a stupid one.

[Someone With Mass]

Il Divo wrote...
And that's exactly the problem. The optional squad deaths doesn't allow this. If someone dies, it's because my Shepard didn't accurately assess the situation, not because the death was out of his hands.

There's a difference?

[Il Divo]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Il Divo wrote...
And that's exactly the problem. The optional squad deaths doesn't allow this. If someone dies, it's because my Shepard didn't accurately assess the situation, not because the death was out of his hands.

There's a difference?

It's subtle, but there is. If I send Miranda to perform the biotic bubble, I made a bad call, since she dies; my Shepard was incompetent because he did not realize that the best course of action was to send Jack/Samara. If Garrus is in a ship, which gets blown up, my Shepard's abilities don't really factor there; there's little I could have done to help him, depending on how the situation is oriented.

[Dean_the_Young]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

An objective viewpoint is a socially-determined one, however.

No. 

(So sick of postmodernism...)

Yes.

(Standards are social instruments.)

[Xilizhra]

Il Divo wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

So I want to RP a smart, caring Shepard who tries to save everyone he can....and yet I can't because he has to deliberately sabotage himself?

And that's exactly the problem. The optional squad deaths doesn't allow this. If someone dies, it's because my Shepard didn't accurately assess the situation, not because the death was out of his hands.

So basically, you want nothing wrong to be your own doing? You want to have completely blameless tragedy? Is that really superior?

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I think it's an acceptable compromise if there's a choice in who dies and the stakes are equal on each side. I would enjoy the option to save everyone, but I won't revolt if it doesn't appear unless it feels like I'm being specifically targeted.

Anything to avoid Halo Reach's way of killing characters. 

I.e, pop them in the head when they're least expecting it or make them do the heroic but stupid sacrifice.

Halo Reach was certainly poorly done, no question there.

Now, if three of the seven died, and your choices in battle determined which three...

[Dean_the_Young]

Xilizhra wrote...

So if it's unrealistic for anyone to be good enough to save everyone, then those who want greater realism can just not do it. Or if they can't, I don't really know why.

Have you ignorred the previous hundred pages, or simply forgotten?

[Someone With Mass]

Il Divo wrote...

It's subtle, but there is. If I send Miranda to perform the biotic bubble, I made a bad call, since she dies; my Shepard was incompetent because he did not realize that the best course of action was to send Jack/Samara. If Garrus is in a ship, which gets blown up, my Shepard's abilities don't really factor there; there's little I could have done to help him, depending on how the situation is oriented.

Though, you don't know the consequences of your actions the first time and neither does Shepard, unless they are clear and you have to make a choice like on Legion's loyalty mission.

If they're going to kill characters off in that kind of uncontrollable fashion, I want a damn good reason why I'm in that situation to begin with.

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

Skill has nothing to do with anything.
As I said before, commandos die just as often as regular grunts (if not more) and they are the most skilled fighters in any army.

Shep should be able to save SOME party memebrs...or people in general. If he's realisticly in position to do so.

So if you feel that the position from which Shepard can save someone is unrealistic, don't take it. Simple.

This.

If it's not your thing, nobody's forcing you to use it.

And no one's forcing you to play Mass Effect, a franchise in which unavoidable costs have been a reoccuring theme in the story.

Except that's a lazy argument to make, so why bother with it?

[Yezdigerd]

Il Divo wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

So I want to RP a smart, caring Shepard who tries to save everyone he can....and yet I can't because he has to deliberately sabotage himself?

And that's exactly the problem. The optional squad deaths doesn't allow this. If someone dies, it's because my Shepard didn't accurately assess the situation, not because the death was out of his hands.

That is how it works in reality as well. If the NATO forces in Afghanistan always accurately gauged the situation they would have no casualties.

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

It's subtle, but there is. If I send Miranda to perform the biotic bubble, I made a bad call, since she dies; my Shepard was incompetent because he did not realize that the best course of action was to send Jack/Samara. If Garrus is in a ship, which gets blown up, my Shepard's abilities don't really factor there; there's little I could have done to help him, depending on how the situation is oriented.

Though, you don't know the consequences of your actions the first time and neither does Shepard, unless they are clear and you have to make a choice like on Legion's loyalty mission.

If they're going to kill characters off in that kind of uncontrollable fashion, I want a damn good reason why I'm in that situation to begin with.

'You are in a war with a hyper-advanced machine race that overran the defenses of one of the four greatest galactic powers in a matter of hours' isn't good enough?

[DaringMoosejaw]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

That specific mision? None. How many Spec Ops team got trough an entire war campaign without casualties? None.

Oh, let's not forget that that same team died in a helicopter accident later. Not even in battle.

And le'ts also not forget that we're talking about soldiers with the best equipment and intel available going against a few guys with AK-47... not machine-cthulus and their army of advanced combat drones and brainwashed slaves.

Actually, 'Seal Team 6' isn't just a unit of like 20 guys. Any Seal that operates in that theatre is considered to be on 'Seal Team 6' and there are, in fact, at least over a hundred of them. I didn't follow up with that story but at the time they weren't telling whether anyone that actually went on that mission was involved in that crash. EDIT: Went snooping around and it turns out absolutely none of the dead were on the bin Laden team.

And the 'Best intel available' can vary quite a goddamned bit, you can't really argue it's much different in Mass Effect.

Modifié par DaringMoosejaw, 20 octobre 2011 - 07:50 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Yezdigerd wrote...

Il Divo wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

So I want to RP a smart, caring Shepard who tries to save everyone he can....and yet I can't because he has to deliberately sabotage himself?

And that's exactly the problem. The optional squad deaths doesn't allow this. If someone dies, it's because my Shepard didn't accurately assess the situation, not because the death was out of his hands.

That is how it works in reality as well. If the NATO forces in Afghanistan always accurately gauged the situation they would have no casualties.

Now that's silly. Casualties are an accepted risk in even the most accurately guaged situations. The goal of warfare isn't to lose no one: it's to get objectives done. Low casualties are an ideal, but they don't go away simply if you prepare enough with perfect knowledge.

[Someone With Mass]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
'You are in a war with a hyper-advanced machine race that overran the defenses of one of the four greatest galactic powers in a matter of hours' isn't good enough?

In that scenario where Garrus is on another ship instead of the Normandy? Not really.

[Dean_the_Young]

Someone With Mass wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
'You are in a war with a hyper-advanced machine race that overran the defenses of one of the four greatest galactic powers in a matter of hours' isn't good enough?

In that scenario where Garrus is on another ship instead of the Normandy? Not really.

The Collector Cruiser and Occuli could see the Normandy... and you think the Reapers can't?

[CptBomBom00]

sure they can.

[Someone With Mass]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
The Collector Cruiser and Occuli could see the Normandy... and you think the Reapers can't?

If the Normandy is destroyed, then at least half of the squad and EDI and Joker will die with Garrus.

That's a situation I'd only want if things are going bad because of my actions.

Because it'd be pretty annoying if everything I owned and cared for just went up in flames. AGAIN.