4309 réponses à ce sujet

[Athayniel]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Athayneil - and that would be your prerogative. The goal would be "Options" - for those who want to sculpt a specific story, a strategy guide (or youtube) would tell you how to get the 10% everyone lives.

For those who want to experience the consequences to their choices - the option exists.

And for the "grim darks" the option to kill everyone and sit on a throne of skulls is there too.

Quite so.

Sometimes when I'm reading the "grim darks" posts it's as if they want to absolve themselves of responsibility for keeping their squaddies alive by pushing the blame onto "The Story". if "The Story" demands a death then there's nothing I can do about it. It's not my fault.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Athayniel wrote...
That is very easy to wrtie poorly. Stupidly easy in fact. And entirely cliche on top of that. It takes extremely good writiing to make a sacrifice worthwhile, as we've already shown with the failure that was Virmire.

Everything needs to be written well. Saying that it is stupidly easy to screw up the "Everyone survives" is just as true.

Also. I am not again being able to save our squadmates from dying. Just not all of them. Being able to save like 80-90% of them and have the rest be like Virmire seems like a good compromise.

Which is why I've always felt that mining out planets and doing LMs are a poor substitute for player skill. If she dies because you're not fast enough or skilled enough, it means a lot more than if she dies because the story demands a death at this point.

No. Putting player skills into equations is terrible. Story and gameplay should be segregated in areas like this.

Athayniel wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Athayneil
- and that would be your prerogative. The goal would be "Options" - for
those who want to sculpt a specific story, a strategy guide (or
youtube) would tell you how to get the 10% everyone lives.

For those who want to experience the consequences to their choices - the option exists.

And for the "grim darks" the option to kill everyone and sit on a throne of skulls is there too.

Quite so. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/cool.png[/smilie]

Sometimes
when I'm reading the "grim darks" posts it's as if they want to absolve
themselves of responsibility for keeping their squaddies alive by
pushing the blame onto "The Story". if "The Story" demands a death then
there's nothing I can do about it. It's not my fault.

"sigh"

Modifié par Lizardviking, 10 octobre 2011 - 04:48 .

[Wulfram]

Athayniel wrote...

Quite so.

Sometimes when I'm reading the "grim darks" posts it's as if they want to absolve themselves of responsibility for keeping their squaddies alive by pushing the blame onto "The Story". if "The Story" demands a death then there's nothing I can do about it. It's not my fault.

Better than having the only way squadmates die be because Shepard is incompetent or a murderer.

[Athayniel]

Lizardviking wrote...

Everything needs to be written well. Saying that it is stupidly easy to screw up the "Everyone survives" is just as true.

You're right. But I think when you've built up characters to be bad ass, it is less contrived for them to survive against difficult odds than to throw them into the cliched no-win scenario. See Virmire

Also. I am not again being able to save our squadmates from dying. Just not all of them. Being able to save like 80-90% of them and have the rest be like Virmire seems like a good compromise.

Have we not already discussed how Virmire was just a meaningless popularity contest which just made most people mad instead of sad?

No. Putting player skills into equations is terrible. Story and gameplay should be segregated in areas like this.

I'm not talking just twitch based skill. Or are you arguing that RPGs don't require player skill or that RPG story outcomes don't depend on the player defeating enemies?

Athayniel wrote...

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Athayneil
- and that would be your prerogative. The goal would be "Options" - for
those who want to sculpt a specific story, a strategy guide (or
youtube) would tell you how to get the 10% everyone lives.

For those who want to experience the consequences to their choices - the option exists.

And for the "grim darks" the option to kill everyone and sit on a throne of skulls is there too.

Quite so. [smilie]../../../images/forum/emoticons/cool.png[/smilie]

Sometimes
when I'm reading the "grim darks" posts it's as if they want to absolve
themselves of responsibility for keeping their squaddies alive by
pushing the blame onto "The Story". if "The Story" demands a death then
there's nothing I can do about it. It's not my fault.

"sigh"

Let me point to what Wulfram said about the same quote:

Wulfram wrote...

Better than having the only way squadmates die be because Shepard is incompetent or a murderer.

He's basically saying he wants to be able to blame "The Story" for squadmate's death rather than his Shepard. If there's no player agency in the decision then Shepard can't be found wanting, it wasn't because Shepard wasn't skilled enough or because he didn't care enough.

If a squadmate has to die "for the story" you're going to have a hard time convincing me that it's worthwhile, because I think overcoming impossible odds always makes for a more fulfilling escapist story. Especially when I can contribute to the whole overcoming of impossible odds by playing a better Shepard.

Modifié par Athayniel, 10 octobre 2011 - 06:00 .

[sg1fan75]

I like happy endings , as a kid I loved The Return of the Jedi (the original version). I like to save the day in my games, I was a Fire Fighter for 7 years you can not save them all but you never stop wanting to, so in Mass Effect 2 when I saved my team and the crew I was very happy. Realism is nice for people that have never seen the cold hard facts of life and death up close. I will take the joy of saving the day in a game keep reality in the real world thanks. If I can I will save as many as possible in ME3.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Athayniel wrote...

You're right. But I think when you've built up characters to be bad ass, it is less contrived for them to survive against difficult odds than to throw them into the cliched no-win scenario. See Virmire

God forbid the story reducing Shepard's Mary sue level and have the villains be as strong as the hero.

Have we not already discussed how Virmire was just a meaningless popularity contest which just made most people mad instead of sad?

Have we not already discussed how the suicide mission was a meaningless experience where people just reloaded to get what they wanted?

I'm not talking just twitch based skill. Or are you arguing that RPGs don't require player skill or that RPG story outcomes don't depend on the player defeating enemies?

What? I am arguing that a player's skill in terms of gunplay or with powers shouldn't affect how the story pans out. When gameplay and story do combine (see Thane's LM/Garrus recruitment) the timer or whatever should be generous enough to allow people to complete it without hassle no matter their skill level.

He's basically saying he wants to be able to blame "The Story" for squadmate's death rather than his Shepard. If there's no player agency in the decision then Shepard can't be found wanting, it wasn't because Shepard wasn't skilled enough or because he didn't care enough.

If a squadmate has to die "for the story" you're going to have a hard time convincing me that it's worthwhile, because I think overcoming impossible odds always makes for a more fulfilling escapist story. Especially when I can contribute to the whole overcoming of impossible odds by playing a better Shepard.

I would say that a story where the hero takes loses and suffers setbacks along the way, but ultimativly pulls through and when the dust settles. He gets his happy ending with his love interest, with most of his friend still alive and at his side. To be a just as strong, if not stronger story.

[Medhia Nox]

@sg1fan75: And the lives you helped save - that's the "drama". That's what people should want to know about. Instead - they all want to know about those who died in the fires. They've likely never experienced anything so "real" - so, they think that portraying it in a video game is "realism".

What they want - is a tragedy simulator. What I would suggest they need - is perspective (sadly, this usually only comes from experiencing real tragedy)

Kudos to you for putting yourself out there to help save lives.

[Wulfram]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@sg1fan75: And the lives you helped save - that's the "drama". That's what people should want to know about. Instead - they all want to know about those who died in the fires. They've likely never experienced anything so "real" - so, they think that portraying it in a video game is "realism".

What they want - is a tragedy simulator. What I would suggest they need - is perspective (sadly, this usually only comes from experiencing real tragedy)

Kudos to you for putting yourself out there to help save lives.

I don't want tragedy, I want heroism.  Part of heroism is sacrifice.  Getting special plot shields because you're Shepards friend while the rest of the galaxy burns isn't heroic.

[Medhia Nox]

@Wulfram: The notion that three plucky soldiers can go toe to toe with an armada of ancient space cuttlefish - is one huge suit of plot armor already.

[sg1fan75]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@sg1fan75: And the lives you helped save - that's the "drama". That's what people should want to know about. Instead - they all want to know about those who died in the fires. They've likely never experienced anything so "real" - so, they think that portraying it in a video game is "realism".

What they want - is a tragedy simulator. What I would suggest they need - is perspective (sadly, this usually only comes from experiencing real tragedy)

Kudos to you for putting yourself out there to help save lives.

that is true to many people view death through the haze of movies and TV.Thank you:), I still miss the job I loved being a Fire Fighter, the pay was low the hours were long but everyday was a chance to make a real differance. I am now studying to be a Nurse I will always try to save lives when humanly possible.

[Wulfram]

Medhia Nox wrote...

@Wulfram: The notion that three plucky soldiers can go toe to toe with an armada of ancient space cuttlefish - is one huge suit of plot armor already.

Which is why putting a few holes in it is good.

[Medhia Nox]

@sg1fan75 - from one noble profession to another - good luck with schooling.

@Wulfram - I guess what I'm trying to say is: "This is not that story no matter how much you want it to be." How many people should die to make it "real"? All of them? Just the LI?

Technically - Navigator Pressly died. Does he count? I'm pretty sure several "ensigns" died in the Collector attack - how's 'bout them?

What about Ashley/Kaidan... they died.

How many more need to die to sate the bloodlust of a rabid society!!! HOW MANY! (this last line isn't serious)

[Athayniel]

Lizardviking wrote...
God forbid the story reducing Shepard's Mary sue level and have the villains be as strong as the hero.

Your argument would be more compelling if these scripted deaths weren't usually contrived situations like Virmire. Even 'last stand' scenarios are usually cliche.

Have we not already discussed how the suicide mission was a meaningless experience where people just reloaded to get what they wanted?

I've never argued the SM was well implemented mechanically. All I've argued is that forcing squadmate deaths for "Drama!" is mostly meaningless in an interactive story.

What? I am arguing that a player's skill in terms of gunplay or with powers shouldn't affect how the story pans out. When gameplay and story do combine (see Thane's LM/Garrus recruitment) the timer or whatever should be generous enough to allow people to complete it without hassle no matter their skill level.

I'm not arguing that completing a mission should be excessively hard. But getting the best outcome possible by affecting discrete parts of the mission should take at least some skill and effort on the player's part. I feel that in an interactive story, the loss of a squadmate should never be "required" unless there's a very good reason. I don't consider invoking "this sh*t just got real!" to be a very good reason.

I would say that a story where the hero takes loses and suffers setbacks along the way, but ultimativly pulls through and when the dust settles. He gets his happy ending with his love interest, with most of his friend still alive and at his side. To be a just as strong, if not stronger story.

I'm saying that shouldn't be the only possible outcome. This is a game with multiple endings. An ending where everybody lives should be available as a reward for the players willing to put the time and effort into it. And yes I'm a Doctor Who fan.

Modifié par Athayniel, 10 octobre 2011 - 07:11 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

Wulfram wrote...

Part of heroism is sacrifice. 

Says who?

[Medhia Nox]

Not to mention that sacrifice can come in many ways - and it's insanely narcissistic to say that someone NPC dying, is Shepard sacrificing.

If Tali dies - then Tali sacrificed for the mission. Shepard just stood around collecting awesome points.

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 10 octobre 2011 - 07:24 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

Athayniel wrote...

Your argument would be more compelling if these scripted deaths weren't usually contrived situations like Virmire. Even 'last stand' scenarios are usually cliche.

... 

I've never argued the SM was well implemented mechanically. All I've argued is that forcing squadmate deaths for "Drama!" is mostly meaningless in an interactive story.

"Contrived" and "cliche" are exactly the words that apply to most of the "FOR DRAMA!" deaths in present-day media. 

[BlueMagitek]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Wulfram wrote...

Part of heroism is sacrifice. 

Says who?

One of the traditional (or romanticized) ideas about heroes is that they are willing to sacrifice things important to them in order to prevent the same from happening to others.  Be the sacrifice money, power, or friendship or even the lives (and the lives they command).

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Athayniel wrote...
Your argument would be more compelling if these scripted deaths weren't usually contrived situations like Virmire. Even 'last stand' scenarios are usually cliche.

Then let us hope they won't make it contrived yes?

And frankly. Sounds like any kind danger to you is contrived.

I've never argued the SM was well implemented mechanically. All I've argued is that forcing squadmate deaths for "Drama!" is mostly meaningless in an interactive story.

And everyone living just so the player can stroke their ego is better?

I'm not arguing that completing a mission should be excessively hard. But getting the best outcome possible by affecting discrete parts of the mission should take at least some skill and effort on the player's part. I feel that in an interactive story, the loss of a squadmate should never be "required" unless there's a very good reason. I don't consider invoking "this sh*t just got real!" to be a very good reason.

If you mean "skill and effort" as in "choices" then I agree. But actually gameplay skill? Sorry, gotta disagree here, maybe somewhere down the line. But right now, I appreciate Bioware segregating gameplay from story.

I'm saying that shouldn't be nthe only possible outcome. This is a game with multiple endings. An ending where everybody lives should be available as a reward for the players willing to put the time and effort into it. And yes I'm a Doctor Who fan.

Because having such an ending cheapens all the other versions.

Not sure what Dr. Who has to with anything? Never watched the show (it does not air in Denmark).

[Wulfram]

Medhia Nox wrote...

Not to mention that sacrifice can come in many ways - and it's insanely narcissistic to say that someone NPC dying, is Shepard sacrificing.

If Tali dies - then Tali sacrificed for the mission. Shepard just stood around collecting awesome points.

Well, exactly.  One of the best things about squadmate death is it's an opportunity for them to show their heroism, rather than being stuck in the shadow of the PC.

[crimzontearz]

it's been discussed to death and as always my response is "power in choices"

there should be a whole range of possibilities including of course the sunshine and bunnies ending and the "we won...but at what cost" ending. I want my happy ending of course.

[crimzontearz]

also..the existence of any ending does not cheapen the others.

people need to stop trying to impose their vision of "right and wrong" or "fulfilling and meaningful" on others since they are entirely subjective concepts. It is OUR story according to Bioware (within our given boundries of course)...so thank you very much but I'll take the ending I prefer in MY story...if possible a "no man left behind" ending with my shepard riding off in the sunset....others can choose their own endings....no judgement or impositions

[Wulfram]

crimzontearz wrote...

also..the existence of any ending does not cheapen the others.

Yes, it can.  If you still get the happy ending by avoiding the heroic sacrifice, then people who made it start looking like idiots.

[nitefyre410]

Wulfram wrote...

crimzontearz wrote...

also..the existence of any ending does not cheapen the others.

Yes, it can.  If you still get the happy ending by avoiding the heroic sacrifice, then people who made it start looking like idiots.

 


that is of course under that direct assumption to defeat said threat there must be a Heroic Sacrifice.. 

[Medhia Nox]

@Wulfram - again, I would suggest: "This is not that story."

Shepard is the hero - the rest of the cast support.

I am hoping CRPGs move back to ensemble casts... but I doubt it will happen.