4309 réponses à ce sujet

[Collider]

"You're not allowed to have fun if you don't share my views on a video game!"

[AdmiralCheez]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Are you really shocked that he considers encouraging civil, level-headed bahavior "wrong and emotional"?

Yes.  Because he's a smart guy who takes the time to goof around with people he doesn't agree with and puts serious thought into his posts, even if he's sometimes a little harsh.

And I don't really like how you're bashing the other side, either.  Nobody's going to agree to anything if all we ever offer each other is mud and acid.

[Golden Owl]

Collider wrote...

"You're not allowed to have fun if you don't share my views on a video game!"

Exactly.......apparently.......

[Computer_God91]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

There is a point where character love/hate/fanbase rivalry gets out of control.  I do agree that it's ridiculous to declare a series ruined forever if your favorite character dies.  However, on more than one occasion, I've caught myself and people I know losing interest in a series because so-and-so got axed or whatever.  For example, you know that webcomic, Guilded Age?  Really similar to Looking for Group.  It was funny, but deep when it needed to be, and I really enjoyed it.

Well, all of the sudden, things took a turn for the super-serious, all the good guys got captured, and Byron (the berserker/hero/whatever) died.  I think he got brought back to life or something or whatever, but I'd stopped reading it.  I just... lost interest.  And Byron wasn't even my favorite character.

It was just, meh, too gloomydark.

But seriously, your attitude is a little too acidic to do anyone any good.  You can make your points without mud-slinging.

Normally I do make my points without mud slinging but sometimes I get so annoyed to the point where I just have to. Gotta feed my rage every once and a while. Anyway, you're obviously not a fan of dark stories where some people die along the way. I love that kind of story telling and to me the way Mass Effect has been built up over the series is that it is going to get dark. So to me that means people we love are going to die and if people we love don't die I think that would cheapen the story...which I keep on saying. Sometimes I feel like I'm on loop.

Mi-Chan wrote...

Now we're at the core of things. But rather than the majority it's a rather vocal minority that puts everyone else in a bad light.  I like to think that everyone's intellectual, if heated when they defend their character. And sometimes what they say can make them sound like raving fanboys. What can I say, we're human. 

Yea everyone does it. I'll admit I get that way over ME1.

Modifié par Computer_God91, 09 octobre 2011 - 06:11 .

[CoffeeHolic93]

Computer_God91 wrote...



Normally I do make my points without mud slinging but sometimes I get so annoyed to the point where I just have to. Gotta feed my rage every once and a while. Anyway, you're obviously not a fan of dark stories where some people die along the way. I love that kind of story telling and to me the way Mass Effect has been built up over the series is that it is going to get dark. So to me that means people we love are going to die and if people we love don't die I think that would cheapen the story...which I keep on saying. Sometimes I feel like I'm on loop.

I think what Cheez meant is that s/he's not a fan of mood whiplash. Mass Effect started out relatively lighthearted in ME1, and got REALLY dark in ME2 by comparison (although ME1 had it's moments, like Virmire). If it keeps getting darker and darker and there are characters we CAN'T save by default s/he would be annoyed. At least that's how I interpreted it.

Modifié par Mi-Chan, 09 octobre 2011 - 06:11 .

[CoffeeHolic93]

Computer_God91 wrote...


Yea everyone does it. I'll admit I get that way over ME1.

[AdmiralCheez]

Mi-Chan wrote...

I think what Cheez meant is that s/he's not a fan of mood whiplash. Mass Effect started out relatively lighthearted in ME1, and got REALLY dark in ME2 by comparison (although ME1 had it's moments, like Virmire). If it keeps getting darker and darker and there are characters we CAN'T save by default s/he would be annoyed. At least that's how I interpreted it.

Pretty much.

[Computer_God91]

Mi-Chan wrote...

Computer_God91 wrote...



Normally I do make my points without mud slinging but sometimes I get so annoyed to the point where I just have to. Gotta feed my rage every once and a while. Anyway, you're obviously not a fan of dark stories where some people die along the way. I love that kind of story telling and to me the way Mass Effect has been built up over the series is that it is going to get dark. So to me that means people we love are going to die and if people we love don't die I think that would cheapen the story...which I keep on saying. Sometimes I feel like I'm on loop.

I think what Cheez meant is that s/he's not a fan of mood whiplash. Mass Effect started out relatively lighthearted in ME1, and got REALLY dark in ME2 by comparison (although ME1 had it's moments, like Virmire). If it keeps getting darker and darker and there are characters we CAN'T save by default s/he would be annoyed. At least that's how I interpreted it.

Cheez is a she. Going off your interpretation though Mass Effect has always been heading toward that dark path and in ME3 it's at it's darkest. It's the end of the galaxy as we know it. What's to be happy about that? also in the other "DONT KILL GARRUS" thread I offered up a good compromise for the scripted death stuff.

Here it is:

Computer_God91 wrote...

Well then you and I should just shake hands and walk away because we've explained our positions and still disagree. I honestly support some scripted deaths regardless who it is because if everyone (with a name) in the series was able to survive what has been built up as impossible to defeat machine genocidists then it would be really cheap story telling. "Oh they're invincible machines but we all managed to survive." Is lame to me. Some people should die no matter what.

However, I like what you suggested earlier with the Sidonis Palivan situation. Based on choices you made in ME1 or ME2 different people would have "scripted" deaths. For example Garrus or Tali will die in ME3, it can't be avoided, but based on choices you made throughout the series decides if Garrus has a "scripted" death or Tali has it. So someone important dies in ME3 and it can't be avoided, but your choices do matter to an extent. I think that would be cooler then a multiple choice "Who do you want to die?" button like Virmire. That way you are, to a certain degree, not in control of who dies but you are because of the past. That would be cooler and I could support something like that.

Modifié par Computer_God91, 09 octobre 2011 - 06:19 .

[CoffeeHolic93]

Computer_God91 wrote...


Cheez is a she. Going off your interpretation though Mass Effect has always been heading toward that dark path and in ME3 it's at it's darkest. It's the end of the galaxy as we know it. What's to be happy about that? also in the other "DONT KILL GARRUS" thread I offered up a good compromise for the scripted death stuff.



Well then you and I should just shake hands and walk away because we've explained our positions and still disagree. I honestly support some scripted deaths regardless who it is because if everyone (with a name) in the series was able to survive what has been built up as impossible to defeat machine genocidists then it would be really cheap story telling. "Oh they're invincible machines but we all managed to survive." Is lame to me. Some people should die no matter what.

However, I like what you suggested earlier with the Sidonis Palivan situation. Based on choices you made in ME1 or ME2 different people would have "scripted" deaths. For example Garrus or Tali will die in ME3, it can't be avoided, but based on choices you made throughout the series decides if Garrus has a "scripted" death or Tali has it. So someone important dies in ME3 and it can't be avoided, but your choices do matter to an extent. I think that would be cooler then a multiple choice "Who do you want to die?" button like Virmire. That way you are, to a certain degree, not in control of who dies but you are because of the past. That would be cooler and I could support something like that.

Cheez is a she, okay then. 


I'm all for a Virmire 2.0 where we choose who we save. But a scripted death (Eg. Garrus dies while defending spaceport x in EVERY playthrough) would do nothing but annoy me. Or a sequence like the suicide mission where you choose someone to go distract the reapers knowing full and well that they will die, that would be great.

[Undertone]

Mi-Chan wrote...

Computer_God91 wrote...



Normally I do make my points without mud slinging but sometimes I get so annoyed to the point where I just have to. Gotta feed my rage every once and a while. Anyway, you're obviously not a fan of dark stories where some people die along the way. I love that kind of story telling and to me the way Mass Effect has been built up over the series is that it is going to get dark. So to me that means people we love are going to die and if people we love don't die I think that would cheapen the story...which I keep on saying. Sometimes I feel like I'm on loop.

I think what Cheez meant is that s/he's not a fan of mood whiplash. Mass Effect started out relatively lighthearted in ME1, and got REALLY dark in ME2 by comparison (although ME1 had it's moments, like Virmire). If it keeps getting darker and darker and there are characters we CAN'T save by default s/he would be annoyed. At least that's how I interpreted it.

They said it was going to be dark except it isn't. ME1 is much darker then ME2 in terms of anything really. You lose two squadmates / NPC on the very first mission, lose a colony and fail to stop the bad guy or get evidence. You have first contact with the Geth and Saren and those dragon teeth and husks. No one believes you and it causes damage for the alliance so you have to find evidence. You are politically pressured into becoming a Spectre and given an almost impossible mission to stop one of the best with only a handful of crew that aren't even the best but people you more or less pick up along the ride. Still you lose somebody, one of the only two humans on the ship and one of the people that is with you from the very beginning of the game. Oh and then they still don't believe you and decide to cut you off so you have to commit treason otherwise the galaxy will burn. The Normandy light is darker blue and even the places you go to are darker. The morality choices are heavier. 

ME2 on the other hand - You get killed in the first 5 min, big deal they revive you in the following other 5 mins. You get your new ship which is twice as good as the original, get full support and backing from Cerberus and get send to recruit the best of the best the galaxy has to offer. The Normandy 2 is like a pleasure hotel with leathers. Solve some daddy issues on a paradise resort, babysit someone else or go rescue some workers and then get Zaeed loyalty regardless of how you screwed up 20 years of his life. But oh who cares? You have the superior morality... Mhm. Do the so called suicide mission, don't lose anyone and feel badass cause omg it was so hard and the choices were so tricky. Only exception to the entire game is when you get the Reaper IFF. 

So here's hoping that ME3 looks more like ME1, although I doubt it. 

[Computer_God91]

Mi-Chan wrote...

Computer_God91 wrote...


Cheez is a she. Going off your interpretation though Mass Effect has always been heading toward that dark path and in ME3 it's at it's darkest. It's the end of the galaxy as we know it. What's to be happy about that? also in the other "DONT KILL GARRUS" thread I offered up a good compromise for the scripted death stuff.



Well then you and I should just shake hands and walk away because we've explained our positions and still disagree. I honestly support some scripted deaths regardless who it is because if everyone (with a name) in the series was able to survive what has been built up as impossible to defeat machine genocidists then it would be really cheap story telling. "Oh they're invincible machines but we all managed to survive." Is lame to me. Some people should die no matter what.

However, I like what you suggested earlier with the Sidonis Palivan situation. Based on choices you made in ME1 or ME2 different people would have "scripted" deaths. For example Garrus or Tali will die in ME3, it can't be avoided, but based on choices you made throughout the series decides if Garrus has a "scripted" death or Tali has it. So someone important dies in ME3 and it can't be avoided, but your choices do matter to an extent. I think that would be cooler then a multiple choice "Who do you want to die?" button like Virmire. That way you are, to a certain degree, not in control of who dies but you are because of the past. That would be cooler and I could support something like that.

Cheez is a she, okay then. 


I'm all for a Virmire 2.0 where we choose who we save. But a scripted death (Eg. Garrus dies while defending spaceport x in EVERY playthrough) would do nothing but annoy me. Or a sequence like the suicide mission where you choose someone to go distract the reapers knowing full and well that they will die, that would be great.

My problem with that is it doesn't have the same impact as killing someone everyone loves no matter what. You can just easily send someone to their doom who you don't care about and that impact is lost to you.

[CoffeeHolic93]

Undertone wrote...


They said it was going to be dark except it isn't. ME1 is much darker then ME2 in terms of anything really. You lose two squadmates / NPC on the very first mission, lose a colony and fail to stop the bad guy or get evidence. You have first contact with the Geth and Saren and those dragon teeth and husks. No one believes you and it causes damage for the alliance so you have to find evidence. You are politically pressured into becoming a Spectre and given an almost impossible mission to stop one of the best with only a handful of crew that aren't even the best but people you more or less pick up along the ride. Still you lose somebody, one of the only two humans on the ship and one of the people that is with you from the very beginning of the game. Oh and then they still don't believe you and decide to cut you off so you have to commit treason otherwise the galaxy will burn. The Normandy light is darker blue and even the places you go to are darker. The morality choices are heavier. 

ME2 on the other hand - You get killed in the first 5 min, big deal they revive you in the following other 5 mins. You get your new ship which is twice as good as the original, get full support and backing from Cerberus and get send to recruit the best of the best the galaxy has to offer. The Normandy 2 is like a pleasure hotel with leathers. Solve some daddy issues on a paradise resort, babysit someone else or go rescue some workers and then get Zaeed loyalty regardless of how you screwed up 20 years of his life. But oh who cares? You have the superior morality... Mhm. Do the so called suicide mission, don't lose anyone and feel badass cause omg it was so hard and the choices were so tricky. Only exception to the entire game is when you get the Reaper IFF. 

So here's hoping that ME3 looks more like ME1, although I doubt it. 

 It's true that the content of ME1 is more disturbing than the second game overall, the second game has a moodier tone. The first kept it lighthearted with blue hues, music in every hub so on so forth. Meanwhile the second game is much more sterile looking, the hub music is replaced with background chatter making it feel more "realistic" which leads to a more gloomy feel.


Keep in mind that this is just my opinion, and you don't have to agree. 

[Undertone]

Computer_God91 wrote...

Mi-Chan wrote...

Computer_God91 wrote...


Cheez is a she. Going off your interpretation though Mass Effect has always been heading toward that dark path and in ME3 it's at it's darkest. It's the end of the galaxy as we know it. What's to be happy about that? also in the other "DONT KILL GARRUS" thread I offered up a good compromise for the scripted death stuff.



Well then you and I should just shake hands and walk away because we've explained our positions and still disagree. I honestly support some scripted deaths regardless who it is because if everyone (with a name) in the series was able to survive what has been built up as impossible to defeat machine genocidists then it would be really cheap story telling. "Oh they're invincible machines but we all managed to survive." Is lame to me. Some people should die no matter what.

However, I like what you suggested earlier with the Sidonis Palivan situation. Based on choices you made in ME1 or ME2 different people would have "scripted" deaths. For example Garrus or Tali will die in ME3, it can't be avoided, but based on choices you made throughout the series decides if Garrus has a "scripted" death or Tali has it. So someone important dies in ME3 and it can't be avoided, but your choices do matter to an extent. I think that would be cooler then a multiple choice "Who do you want to die?" button like Virmire. That way you are, to a certain degree, not in control of who dies but you are because of the past. That would be cooler and I could support something like that.

Cheez is a she, okay then. 


I'm all for a Virmire 2.0 where we choose who we save. But a scripted death (Eg. Garrus dies while defending spaceport x in EVERY playthrough) would do nothing but annoy me. Or a sequence like the suicide mission where you choose someone to go distract the reapers knowing full and well that they will die, that would be great.

My problem with that is it doesn't have the same impact as killing someone everyone loves no matter what. You can just easily send someone to their doom who you don't care about and that impact is lost to you.

Exactly popularity choices. Basically everyone will send off Jack, Zaeed, Jacob and all the other not so popular characters to save Garrus, Tali or Liara. Where's the emotional impact in that? At least it's better then not losing absolutely anyone. 

[Computer_God91]

Undertone wrote...

Mi-Chan wrote...

Computer_God91 wrote...



Normally I do make my points without mud slinging but sometimes I get so annoyed to the point where I just have to. Gotta feed my rage every once and a while. Anyway, you're obviously not a fan of dark stories where some people die along the way. I love that kind of story telling and to me the way Mass Effect has been built up over the series is that it is going to get dark. So to me that means people we love are going to die and if people we love don't die I think that would cheapen the story...which I keep on saying. Sometimes I feel like I'm on loop.

I think what Cheez meant is that s/he's not a fan of mood whiplash. Mass Effect started out relatively lighthearted in ME1, and got REALLY dark in ME2 by comparison (although ME1 had it's moments, like Virmire). If it keeps getting darker and darker and there are characters we CAN'T save by default s/he would be annoyed. At least that's how I interpreted it.

They said it was going to be dark except it isn't. ME1 is much darker then ME2 in terms of anything really. You lose two squadmates / NPC on the very first mission, lose a colony and fail to stop the bad guy or get evidence. You have first contact with the Geth and Saren and those dragon teeth and husks. No one believes you and it causes damage for the alliance so you have to find evidence. You are politically pressured into becoming a Spectre and given an almost impossible mission to stop one of the best with only a handful of crew that aren't even the best but people you more or less pick up along the ride. Still you lose somebody, one of the only two humans on the ship and one of the people that is with you from the very beginning of the game. Oh and then they still don't believe you and decide to cut you off so you have to commit treason otherwise the galaxy will burn. The Normandy light is darker blue and even the places you go to are darker. The morality choices are heavier. 

ME2 on the other hand - You get killed in the first 5 min, big deal they revive you in the following other 5 mins. You get your new ship which is twice as good as the original, get full support and backing from Cerberus and get send to recruit the best of the best the galaxy has to offer. The Normandy 2 is like a pleasure hotel with leathers. Solve some daddy issues on a paradise resort, babysit someone else or go rescue some workers and then get Zaeed loyalty regardless of how you screwed up 20 years of his life. But oh who cares? You have the superior morality... Mhm. Do the so called suicide mission, don't lose anyone and feel badass cause omg it was so hard and the choices were so tricky. Only exception to the entire game is when you get the Reaper IFF. 

So here's hoping that ME3 looks more like ME1, although I doubt it. 

Thank you. You put into words what I couldn't. The reason why I love ME1 soooooo much and find ME2 a disappointment in comparison. I'm also hoping ME3 is more like ME1 as well and share your doubt.

[AdmiralCheez]

Computer_God91 wrote...

Normally I do make my points without mud slinging but sometimes I get so annoyed to the point where I just have to. Gotta feed my rage every once and a while. Anyway, you're obviously not a fan of dark stories where some people die along the way. I love that kind of story telling and to me the way Mass Effect has been built up over the series is that it is going to get dark. So to me that means people we love are going to die and if people we love don't die I think that would cheapen the story...which I keep on saying. Sometimes I feel like I'm on loop.

I don't mind dark stories.  In fact, one of my favorite books is The Killer Angels, which is a novelization of the Battle of Gettysburg during the American Civil War.  It's absolutely heartbreaking at times, but it tells a powerful story with great and memorable characters, all the while being so goddamn historically accurate it's like the author was f*cking there.  I also really liked All Quiet on the Western Front, but that was so goddamn depressing that I don't plan on reading it again any time soon.  And the film Schindler's List, despite how inherently disturbing it is, is a masterpiece.

So I love me some gloomydark war stories, especially of the historical variety, but they tend to wear me down.  I can't pick up and read Killer Angels just to have some fun and escape my everyday woes.  One of Mass Effect's selling points is that it's highly replayable, and it gives the player room to tell his or her own story with it.  I can't play through it a million times if it leaves me in a worse mood than when I picked it up, and removing the player's power to tell a happy-ish story sort of shoots one of its selling points in the foot.

You say that it's impossible to create weight and value without killing off squadmates.  I say it is; I even proved examples of how to obtain darkness and desperation with a 100% alive squad (let me know if you want me to repeat them).  Additionally, several people proposed making keeping your squad alive very difficult or requiring to take major losses in other areas, and I agreed with them.

To be honest, I think auto-killing squadmates to generate drama is just as cheap as knocking the Reapers out of the galaxy without taking a single hit.

Ultimately, my point is this: Since nobody can completely agree on what makes a good story, and since Mass Effect is a deeply personal experience, why not take advantage of multiple pathways and outcomes so that endings range from more-sweet-than-bitter to Reapers-win-and-everyone-dies?  If a player is willing to put in the right amount of effort and compromise, shouldn't they be rewarded with an ending that makes them feel personally satisfied?

Yea everyone does it. I'll admit I get that way over ME1.

If you hand't mentioned it, I would never have guessed

[Computer_God91]

Undertone wrote...

Exactly popularity choices. Basically everyone will send off Jack, Zaeed, Jacob and all the other not so popular characters to save Garrus, Tali or Liara. Where's the emotional impact in that? At least it's better then not losing absolutely anyone. 

I think it could be worse actually, because the moment is set up to be a hard choice and turns itself into a popularity contest and loses its emotional weight. Same can be said about Virmire but to me to this day I still have a hard time dealing with leaving Kaidan on Virmire. That was a successful emotional impactful choice if it still bugs me to this day.

[Esbatty]

I would be heartbroken to lose any Squadmates in ME3 BUT if they perish due to decisions/choices made in ME1/ME2 I wouldn't mind that. Lets say he sacrifices himself for Shepard in the latter half of ME3 because I helped him kill Dr. Heart and Sidonis, allowing him to have closure in two major events in his life. Or Grunt, doesn't kill himself, but seriously risks his own life because I took a Renegade stance in bringing him up, by giving him purpose and being a violent/headstrong example to the young Krogan.

I wouldn't mind that sort of outcome for them but if they're offed whether I treated them well or neglected them, it'd have to be some kind of strong emotional payoff there.

[Undertone]

Computer_God91 wrote...

Undertone wrote...

Exactly popularity choices. Basically everyone will send off Jack, Zaeed, Jacob and all the other not so popular characters to save Garrus, Tali or Liara. Where's the emotional impact in that? At least it's better then not losing absolutely anyone. 

I think it could be worse actually, because the moment is set up to be a hard choice and turns itself into a popularity contest and loses its emotional weight. Same can be said about Virmire but to me to this day I still have a hard time dealing with leaving Kaidan on Virmire. That was a successful emotional impactful choice if it still bugs me to this day.

I always pick Kaidan regardless if he is romance or if I play male or female. I deem a biotic to be more useful to me in the long run plus Ashley is an ordinary soldier. Easy to replace. 

Modifié par Undertone, 09 octobre 2011 - 06:47 .

[Computer_God91]

oops. I hit the wrong button. Post is gone.

Modifié par Computer_God91, 09 octobre 2011 - 05:43 .

[Computer_God91]

Undertone wrote...

I always pick Kaidan regardless if he is romance or if I play male or female. I deem a biotic to be more useful to me in the long run plus Ashley is an ordinary soldier. Easy to replace. 

Yea, you took a practical approach to it. I just couldn't leave a woman to die and I liked her anyway, she was my first romance before I knew Liara was romance-able. I still hate the fact that I couldn't just save them both though. Which is a good thing because if I could have I would have and that'd would have robbed the weight of the choice.

[Golden Owl]

Mi-Chan wrote...

Undertone wrote...


They said it was going to be dark except it isn't. ME1 is much darker then ME2 in terms of anything really. You lose two squadmates / NPC on the very first mission, lose a colony and fail to stop the bad guy or get evidence. You have first contact with the Geth and Saren and those dragon teeth and husks. No one believes you and it causes damage for the alliance so you have to find evidence. You are politically pressured into becoming a Spectre and given an almost impossible mission to stop one of the best with only a handful of crew that aren't even the best but people you more or less pick up along the ride. Still you lose somebody, one of the only two humans on the ship and one of the people that is with you from the very beginning of the game. Oh and then they still don't believe you and decide to cut you off so you have to commit treason otherwise the galaxy will burn. The Normandy light is darker blue and even the places you go to are darker. The morality choices are heavier. 

ME2 on the other hand - You get killed in the first 5 min, big deal they revive you in the following other 5 mins. You get your new ship which is twice as good as the original, get full support and backing from Cerberus and get send to recruit the best of the best the galaxy has to offer. The Normandy 2 is like a pleasure hotel with leathers. Solve some daddy issues on a paradise resort, babysit someone else or go rescue some workers and then get Zaeed loyalty regardless of how you screwed up 20 years of his life. But oh who cares? You have the superior morality... Mhm. Do the so called suicide mission, don't lose anyone and feel badass cause omg it was so hard and the choices were so tricky. Only exception to the entire game is when you get the Reaper IFF. 

So here's hoping that ME3 looks more like ME1, although I doubt it. 

 It's true that the content of ME1 is more disturbing than the second game overall, the second game has a moodier tone. The first kept it lighthearted with blue hues, music in every hub so on so forth. Meanwhile the second game is much more sterile looking, the hub music is replaced with background chatter making it feel more "realistic" which leads to a more gloomy feel.


Keep in mind that this is just my opinion, and you don't have to agree. 

One word...'Overlord'....

[CoffeeHolic93]

Golden Owl wrote...
One word...'Overlord'....

Overlord is a brilliant example, thank you. Very very depressing though.

[AdmiralCheez]

Computer_God91 wrote...

The problem is that Mass Effect from the begining has been a dark story about heartless machines that only want to destroy all advanced life in the galaxy. That's straight up dark. I wouldn't want to retreat to a universe like that to feel better about myself. You just have to deal with it getting darker. I would like you to repeat or quote how you can make the threat seem real and have weight without death because I haven't read that from you yet.

Without death of squadmates.

Okay, so let's say you have to visit this city that's been leveled by the Reapers.  As you travel through it, you see all the death and destruction that has happened, and survivors keep looking at you like it's somehow your fault.  Or there's the opening level of ME3, where you see the kid you met five minutes ago make it safely onto a transport... only to get vaporized by a Reaper laser.  Or perhaps some big plan blows up in your face, and you see your squad completely lose hope because you simply don't have any real way to fight back.

And no, Mass Effect is not dark.  Not when I can paragon my way to glory, teach my squadmates the power of tolerance and understanding other points of view, and woosh in to save the friends and family of people that ask for my help.  It is not dark when you see Shepard limping out from under the rubble as light shoots through the windows and the main theme kicks up.  There is no way in hell that people would have a bajillion playthroughs of a game that made them feel bad about themselves.  Go back, read all the comments about how people enjoy playing as Shepard because they love being able to play hero.  Mass Effect is so damn popular because it supplies serious escapism, hidden behind brilliant storytelling and combat that's only okay.

I agree, there should be a lot of branches the game can end in. I've never not supported that. The problem with that is (ME2 proved this) it's so damn easy to get the perfect ending that the threat doesn't even seem real. So having harsh endings be standard makes it so that the threat doesn't seem laughable.

Perhaps the alternative is to make it less easy, then.  Bioware needs to learn to attempt to actually improve things instead of just cutting them for something else entirely.

[TuringPoint]

I don't think they'll make it *too* dark, as they want a satisfying ending. they want satisfying, they don't want to make it so dark you don't care.

You aren't saying, "don't make it dark, bioware!" right?  That's not the impression I get.

Modifié par Alocormin, 09 octobre 2011 - 07:31 .

[SandTrout]

Regardless of weather it is possible to save my entire crew, I do plan on arranging some appropriately dramatic deaths for some of the characters. (Get ready for your blaze of glory, Garus)