4309 réponses à ce sujet

[Kaiser Shepard]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

As opposed to the grimdarkdeathbloodkewlgrim setting "appropriate" for the 13-16 crowd?

If that is the way to maintain verisimilitude - you know, that thing you have listed in your sig - then yeah.

Not sure how catering to the "I like being the biggest d-bag possible in video games" crowd does anything to maintain verisimilitude... 

What does that have to do with anything?

[Killjoy Cutter]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

I've tried to read the whole thread, but I'm sure I've missed some things. 

Why do you YOU want it to be exceedingly hard to get through ME3 without losing a squadmate? 

Because to me, that makes it more realistic: people die in war, and often soldiers. And, as much as some would like to say so, the deaths of faceless people will not affect someone AS MUCH (as much, not "at all") as the death of someone near. I feel it would make the story more poigant.

And, I DON'T feel that people who don't want what I want are "immature" with "emotional problems." You shouldn't generalize like that, is what I'm saying. Each side has valid points.

Well, it's a relief that someone on your side isn't accusing the other side of such things, there's been a lot of it.   I've seen a TON of it lately, and frankly I felt like giving a sample back to those doing it.  It seems to be the standard method of internet argument now... imply or outright declare something belittling and demeaning about anyone taking the other side of the argument. 

[Killjoy Cutter]

Nyoka wrote...

I disagree on the suicide mission. You say, "if you do the best you possibly can, everyone wins no matter what". Well, something matters: as you said, everyone wins *if you do the best you possibly can*. Which means you have to memorize every step of the game to know when the different missions are going to be triggered. Your Shepard can't possibly know that. That's you metagaming.

In one of my last playthroughs, I didn't have Tali and Legion was unloyal, so when the crew was kidnapped, I had to choose between going right away to the suicide mission to save the crew or get myself a loyal tech specialist so I could make it through the vents without any squadmate dying. That happened to me because I wasn't calculating in advance what was going to happen, I was just playing the game, doing things the way I thought my Shepard would do. Role playing. For this playthrough I had done the Kellymance and was mad as hell to have her taken away, so I went directly to the SM and Legion was destroyed.

Now, if you directly discard role playing and plan ahead every step of the way specifically to get the everyone survives ending, then yeah I can see how not doing one of those steps can feel contrived, but not more contrived than planning the perfect ending. You're planning beforehand in both cases. Moreover, if people here are arguing that bad consequences are cooler than the perfect ending, then why don't they just plan ahead to get the outcome they think is cooler, the same way they plan ahead for the perfect ending? Didn't they want to experience a good drama on their own terms? Seems to me like the underlying thought is "my own particular style of playing kills people, therefore everyone else must have people killed too."

I think it's okay if they make it exceedingly hard, so much harder than in ME2 to get the perfect ending. Do it extremely difficult; it should be! You should feel like a demigod after getting a perfect outcome. But the possibility should be there.

I've never had a single squadmate die on the collector base mission, after more than 20 playthroughs.  And I enjoy it that way.  It's a nice change. 

After a day of real life, what I'm not looking for from my games is yet more frustration, aggravation, and "challenge", and my sense of accomplishment doesn't come from my distractions. 

I don't understand how someone can get much enjoyment out of being forced to take the least bad option over and over again.  I don't understand how someone can get much enjoyment out of making all the right choices, doing all the right things, and still ending up with bittersweet or crapsack outcome.  If they want that kind of thing, there's already the real world to get plenty of it from.  

 

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 08 octobre 2011 - 07:32 .

[AdmiralCheez]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

But...but...I want them. waaaaaaaa...

Then tell your least favorite character you don't love them and watch then jump of a cliff in the endgame cutscene as you giggle maniacally.

Or just hope getting your shiny NOLB is so difficult and counter-intuitive that sacrificing your space husbando/waifu might as well be mandatory anyway.

[AdmiralCheez]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

So i tell every character in ME that I don't love them? Okay, I'll get some Morrigan up in here, she'll be my only squadmate.

*scratches head*
What's a NOLB?

No One Left Behind

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...
*scratches head*
What's a NOLB?

No one left behind?
'd....

Modifié par Lizardviking, 08 octobre 2011 - 08:03 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

laecraft wrote...

Suffering is drama. Drama makes for a good story. Hard choices and painful dilemmas reveal the character, who otherwise remains undefined. Victories are only satisfying if the enemy is just as powerul as you are, or better yet, overwhelming. That power is shown by the heavy losses the hero suffers. There's no other way. If the enemy is so weak that you defeat it without any sacrificies that matter to you personally, then it's bambi meets godzilla.

The countless faceless deaths are not going to move you as much as a single death of a close companion. And if it were otherwise, as some people try to pretend, then they wouldn't struggle so violently against the very idea of their squadmates dying in the war. "Let millions die, that's already shows the sacrifices. But don't you touch those I care about!" Hah!

That's the difference between fanfiction wish-fulfilment and a solid, engaging story. In fanfiction, the hero prevails without any struggle over the most powerful enemy. Nobody important (read: close to you) ever dies. The hero never suffers. He's completely invulnerable. He's never threatened. There's a total sense of security. I understand that's exactly what you want. And that just shows that some fans do NOT know what they need for the story to be engaging. If you got exactly what you asked for, you'd be bored.

If there's a route where you can save everyone, then it would make the player feel like their Shepardi is sloppy, not caring, and worse yet, incapable leader for not taking it. Thus, everybody will take the "save everyone" route, and everybody gets cheated out of drama.

If there's to be a good story, you all will have to suffer. And Shepard, first and foremost. Brace yourself for it.

+1

[BlueMagitek]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

BlueMagitek wrote...

That puts you in Side A because you believe there should be a way of achieving a "gold" ending.  

And come on now, Side B isn't all that bad; there's nothing wrong with wanting an ending that results in both good and bad outcomes which leaves you wondering which was the correct way to go.  As they have said, there being a "gold" path makes them feel that their endings are "cheap" because, as it turns out, there is a way for everything to work out okay.  Where they're wrong is that they assme they'll have to "act stupid" to *not* attain it.  

Of course, I'd say something about munchkins, but I'm really too tired to do so right now. ~_^

*Scratches head*

I don't think you understand. I won't ask you to go back through this thread, cause there's a lot of bilge, but I AGREE with what you wrote here. That's what I WANT. However, it would be acceptable in my eyes if they did it the side A way, as long as it wasn't a "completionist's win" thing.

So again, what you described up there IS me.

Well the first part is to you, the second part is to KillJoy.  I should have specified it better.

[SlottsMachine]

They could just turn ME3 into one big suicide mission (as seen in ME2), only with more complex situations. With skill and luck you may get everyone through, but not likely. For instance instead of having companions spell the situation out for you, you could find intel either from other operatives in the area or from dead operatives.

You come across some intel on the current situation from a dead Cerberus agent, making a mention of uncomfirmed reports of seeker swarm activity, also maybe you missed this intel or thought it was bogus. Now you have to send someone off by themselves to do something, and you should have the seeker swarm intel right now.

And everyone would be telling you, hey don't expect this person back, so you send Jack cuz she is a badass biotic expecting her to die but you know she will get it done, but she's qualified for the job so she'll be waiting for you on the other side. Pheww, that was close. Maybe you don't have Jack though, so in goes Jacob and he gets the job done but died in the process. Or you may have missed that intel altogether, and sent Kasumi because someone has to go, she fails and dies which leads to an extra Titan waiting for you or you miss something valuable.  

These situations would pile up to the point where it would be very unlikely that you would be successful everytime, but maybe on that 2nd or 3rd playthough you might have it all figured out by then. 

[Abispa]

Save crew, Urz dies. Save Urz, entire team dies.

There is only ONE choice that can be made.

[Undertone]

laecraft wrote...

Suffering is drama. Drama makes for a good story. Hard choices and painful dilemmas reveal the character, who otherwise remains undefined. Victories are only satisfying if the enemy is just as powerul as you are, or better yet, overwhelming. That power is shown by the heavy losses the hero suffers. There's no other way. If the enemy is so weak that you defeat it without any sacrificies that matter to you personally, then it's bambi meets godzilla.

The countless faceless deaths are not going to move you as much as a single death of a close companion. And if it were otherwise, as some people try to pretend, then they wouldn't struggle so violently against the very idea of their squadmates dying in the war. "Let millions die, that's already shows the sacrifices. But don't you touch those I care about!" Hah!

That's the difference between fanfiction wish-fulfilment and a solid, engaging story. In fanfiction, the hero prevails without any struggle over the most powerful enemy. Nobody important (read: close to you) ever dies. The hero never suffers. He's completely invulnerable. He's never threatened. There's a total sense of security. I understand that's exactly what you want. And that just shows that some fans do NOT know what they need for the story to be engaging. If you got exactly what you asked for, you'd be bored.

If there's a route where you can save everyone, then it would make the player feel like their Shepardi is sloppy, not caring, and worse yet, incapable leader for not taking it. Thus, everybody will take the "save everyone" route, and everybody gets cheated out of drama.

If there's to be a good story, you all will have to suffer. And Shepard, first and foremost. Brace yourself for it.

I couldn't agree more with this or express the same statement with such eloquence. 

I also find it hilarious how those of us that want "drama" are generalized as "wanna be tough guys". I'm looking at you Nyoka. It's really fun how you skip a lot of good arguments and make some poor excuse of psychological analysis. I didn't expect that from you. 

[Aggie Punbot]

Undertone wrote...

I also find it hilarious how those of us that want "drama" are generalized as "wanna be tough guys". I'm looking at you Nyoka. It's really fun how you skip a lot of good arguments and make some poor excuse of psychological analysis. I didn't expect that from you. 

Did you notice that the same thing is being done to the people that don't agree with you? I've lost count of the number of times that pro-death people have tried to claim that the people who want a happy ending want 'sunshines, puppies and rainbows' when no one has asked for that at all. Ever.

[KBomb]

TS2Aggie wrote...

Did you notice that the same thing is being done to the people that don't agree with you? I've lost count of the number of times that pro-death people have tried to claim that the people who want a happy ending want 'sunshines, puppies and rainbows' when no one has asked for that at all. Ever.

And that we have ****ty taste, have no concept of storytelling, that we’re emotionally unstable, that we have the mentality of pre-teens, etcetera, etcetera..

[Aggie Punbot]

KBomb wrote...

TS2Aggie wrote...

Did you notice that the same thing is being done to the people that don't agree with you? I've lost count of the number of times that pro-death people have tried to claim that the people who want a happy ending want 'sunshines, puppies and rainbows' when no one has asked for that at all. Ever.

And that we have ****ty taste, have no concept of storytelling, that we’re emotionally unstable, that we have the mentality of pre-teens, etcetera, etcetera..

That too. But apparently it's only worth noting if you* are the one who is getting treated like that.

* General 'you,' not you in particular.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Undertone wrote...

laecraft wrote...

Suffering is drama. Drama makes for a good story. Hard choices and painful dilemmas reveal the character, who otherwise remains undefined. Victories are only satisfying if the enemy is just as powerul as you are, or better yet, overwhelming. That power is shown by the heavy losses the hero suffers. There's no other way. If the enemy is so weak that you defeat it without any sacrificies that matter to you personally, then it's bambi meets godzilla.

The countless faceless deaths are not going to move you as much as a single death of a close companion. And if it were otherwise, as some people try to pretend, then they wouldn't struggle so violently against the very idea of their squadmates dying in the war. "Let millions die, that's already shows the sacrifices. But don't you touch those I care about!" Hah!

That's the difference between fanfiction wish-fulfilment and a solid, engaging story. In fanfiction, the hero prevails without any struggle over the most powerful enemy. Nobody important (read: close to you) ever dies. The hero never suffers. He's completely invulnerable. He's never threatened. There's a total sense of security. I understand that's exactly what you want. And that just shows that some fans do NOT know what they need for the story to be engaging. If you got exactly what you asked for, you'd be bored.

If there's a route where you can save everyone, then it would make the player feel like their Shepardi is sloppy, not caring, and worse yet, incapable leader for not taking it. Thus, everybody will take the "save everyone" route, and everybody gets cheated out of drama.

If there's to be a good story, you all will have to suffer. And Shepard, first and foremost. Brace yourself for it.

I couldn't agree more with this or express the same statement with such eloquence. 

Why does a good story need to have the drama slathered on thick?  I see more stories that try to slather on the drama that actually stink, than not. 

This whole thing about suffering and drama seems to come out of the same lit-fic school of "rules" for writing that would have us believe that characters are defined and made worthwhile by their flaws. 

And to both notions, I say... whatever. 

Undertone wrote...

I also find it hilarious how those of us that want "drama" are generalized as "wanna be tough guys". I'm looking at you Nyoka. It's really fun how you skip a lot of good arguments and make some poor excuse of psychological analysis. I didn't expect that from you. 

I find it hilarious how those of us who want to skip the wailing and nashing of teeth, and who don't subsribe to the belief that suffering is necessary for a good story are generalized as super-sensitive, emotionally immature, bunny-and-rainbow fru-fru kiddies, with no taste and no concept of storytelling.

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 08 octobre 2011 - 09:30 .