4309 réponses à ce sujet

[jamesp81]

Athayniel wrote...

The only thing being asked for is the chance to save squadmates. Not to prevent the deaths of millions, not to prevent the genocide of entire species or the loss of planets or fleets. Only giving Shepard the chance of keeping his squad alive. How does that take away hard choices?

Choosing between any squadmate and an entire species is a meaningless choice. There is no choice. There is no catharsis, there is no lesson to be learned, there is no realism either. It is not realistic to pit the fate of an entire species on the choice of whether a single person is saved or not. To do so is just monumentally bad writing.

So tell me, how is being given the chance to keep the squad intact while the galaxy as a whole is already burning not 'realistic'? Especially since the more squadmates Shepard loses, the harder the missions will inevitably become. And emember, Shepard confronting reapers on foot is entirely unrealistic. Shepard's mission is not to fight the reapers, but to defeat them.

Here's what I want.  The ability to:

1.  Save Earth
2.  Destroy the Reapers permanently
3.  Prevent any races from being completely exterminated
4.  Keep all my crew alive

Anyone who thinks I shouldn't be given a path of choices that results in this can go die in a huge ****ing fire:devil:

[Wulfram]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

LoL @ "NPCs have to die to not be Shep's 'sidekick'".

Whatever.

They don't have to.  But it's one way they can. 

It's a part of the writers toolbox that I don't think should be excluded just because some people have a narrow definition of what constitutes a happy ending.

[Killjoy Cutter]

jamesp81 wrote...

Athayniel wrote...

The only thing being asked for is the chance to save squadmates. Not to prevent the deaths of millions, not to prevent the genocide of entire species or the loss of planets or fleets. Only giving Shepard the chance of keeping his squad alive. How does that take away hard choices?

Choosing between any squadmate and an entire species is a meaningless choice. There is no choice. There is no catharsis, there is no lesson to be learned, there is no realism either. It is not realistic to pit the fate of an entire species on the choice of whether a single person is saved or not. To do so is just monumentally bad writing.

So tell me, how is being given the chance to keep the squad intact while the galaxy as a whole is already burning not 'realistic'? Especially since the more squadmates Shepard loses, the harder the missions will inevitably become. And emember, Shepard confronting reapers on foot is entirely unrealistic. Shepard's mission is not to fight the reapers, but to defeat them.

Here's what I want.  The ability to:

1.  Save Earth
2.  Destroy the Reapers permanently
3.  Prevent any races from being completely exterminated
4.  Keep all my crew alive

Anyone who thinks I shouldn't be given a path of choices that results in this can go die in a huge ****ing fire:devil:

That about sums it up. 

[Killjoy Cutter]

Wulfram wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

LoL @ "NPCs have to die to not be Shep's 'sidekick'".

Whatever.

They don't have to.  But it's one way they can. 

It's a part of the writers toolbox that I don't think should be excluded just because some people have a narrow definition of what constitutes a happy ending.

As soon as you start viewing possible events in the story as "tools in a box", you're already lost in the land of contrivance. 

[AngusJimiKeith]

I couldn't agree more. Screw "realism." The real world is a s***hole. I don't need a virtual s***hole to remind me of the real s***hole I live in.

[jamesp81]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

jamesp81 wrote...

Athayniel wrote...

The only thing being asked for is the chance to save squadmates. Not to prevent the deaths of millions, not to prevent the genocide of entire species or the loss of planets or fleets. Only giving Shepard the chance of keeping his squad alive. How does that take away hard choices?

Choosing between any squadmate and an entire species is a meaningless choice. There is no choice. There is no catharsis, there is no lesson to be learned, there is no realism either. It is not realistic to pit the fate of an entire species on the choice of whether a single person is saved or not. To do so is just monumentally bad writing.

So tell me, how is being given the chance to keep the squad intact while the galaxy as a whole is already burning not 'realistic'? Especially since the more squadmates Shepard loses, the harder the missions will inevitably become. And emember, Shepard confronting reapers on foot is entirely unrealistic. Shepard's mission is not to fight the reapers, but to defeat them.

Here's what I want.  The ability to:

1.  Save Earth
2.  Destroy the Reapers permanently
3.  Prevent any races from being completely exterminated
4.  Keep all my crew alive

Anyone who thinks I shouldn't be given a path of choices that results in this can go die in a huge ****ing fire:devil:

That about sums it up. 

Truth be told, I think the fate of various races is already written in stone.  BW has talked about making ME games in the future, so I expect to see all endings defeat the Reapers and save whichever races and worlds can be saved.  Consequences for Shepard and crew will likely vary from "sunshine and bunnies" to "epic fail, everyone dies".

Kind of like ME2 SM.  Everyone can die, even Shepard.  But even if he does, the Collectors are still destroyed.

[Wulfram]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

As soon as you start viewing possible events in the story as "tools in a box", you're already lost in the land of contrivance. 

When you start putting special plot armour on a few people because of a needlessly restrictive definition of happy ending, you're lost in the land of contrivance.

[Teredan]

I'm in support of this but it should be for once a challenge to do it. Doing the ME2 last mission with everyon surviving was too easy if you were equipped with common sense. I want irrational decision to make like having two of my squadmates in a pinch not knowing which one needs my help more.

Modifié par Teredan, 11 octobre 2011 - 03:22 .

[Killjoy Cutter]

Wulfram wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

As soon as you start viewing possible events in the story as "tools in a box", you're already lost in the land of contrivance. 

When you start putting special plot armour on a few people because of a needlessly restrictive definition of happy ending, you're lost in the land of contrivance.

"Plot armor" would mean that they can't die in the game no matter what you do. 

No one is asking for that. 

We just see scripted / cut-scene / either-or-choice deaths for the pathetic contrivance that they are. 

Modifié par Killjoy Cutter, 11 octobre 2011 - 03:28 .

[nightcobra]

jamesp81 wrote...

Athayniel wrote...

The only thing being asked for is the chance to save squadmates. Not to prevent the deaths of millions, not to prevent the genocide of entire species or the loss of planets or fleets. Only giving Shepard the chance of keeping his squad alive. How does that take away hard choices?

Choosing between any squadmate and an entire species is a meaningless choice. There is no choice. There is no catharsis, there is no lesson to be learned, there is no realism either. It is not realistic to pit the fate of an entire species on the choice of whether a single person is saved or not. To do so is just monumentally bad writing.

So tell me, how is being given the chance to keep the squad intact while the galaxy as a whole is already burning not 'realistic'? Especially since the more squadmates Shepard loses, the harder the missions will inevitably become. And emember, Shepard confronting reapers on foot is entirely unrealistic. Shepard's mission is not to fight the reapers, but to defeat them.

Here's what I want.  The ability to:

1.  Save Earth
2.  Destroy the Reapers permanently
3.  Prevent any races from being completely exterminated
4.  Keep all my crew alive

Anyone who thinks I shouldn't be given a path of choices that results in this can go die in a huge ****ing fire:devil:

hear hear.

in a game like this i'd rather have the whole spectrum of black/gray/white to choose from not just black or gray.
and judging from the galactic readiness thing i don't think i have much to worry about 

[Wulfram]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

"Plot armor" would mean that they can't die in the game no matter what you do. 

No one is asking for that. 

We just see scripted / cut-scene / either-or deaths for the pathetic contrivance that they are. 

Shepard always being able to save them is a form of plot armour, and just as much if not more of a contrivance.

Modifié par Wulfram, 11 octobre 2011 - 03:26 .

[jamesp81]

Teredan wrote...

I'm in support of this but it should be for once a challenge to do it. Doing the ME2 last mission with everyon surviving was too easy if you were equipped with common sense. I want irrational decision to make like having two of my squadmates in a pinch not knowing which one needs my help more.

And I'm fine with increasing the challenge.  Nothing wrong with that at all.

[jamesp81]

Wulfram wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

"Plot armor" would mean that they can't die in the game no matter what you do. 

No one is asking for that. 

We just see scripted / cut-scene / either-or deaths for the pathetic contrivance that they are. 

Shepard always being able to save them is a form of plot armour, and just as much if not more of a contrivance.

Shepard having a snowball's chance in hell of stopping the Collectors with one ship and a crew of 12 operatives is an enormous contrivance itself.  So is Shepard and 6 other operatives surviving being in the same star system with Sovereign for more than 10 minutes.

By your definitions, the entire series is one massive contrivance of unlikely ass whooping.  Which I'm OK with.

[Killjoy Cutter]

Wulfram wrote...

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

"Plot armor" would mean that they can't die in the game no matter what you do. 

No one is asking for that. 

We just see scripted / cut-scene / either-or deaths for the pathetic contrivance that they are. 

Shepard always being able to save them is a form of plot armour, and just as much if not more of a contrivance.

So it's OK for the writers to deliberately and specifically set up a situation in which Shep can't same someone, just so that he can't save someone?  And that's not a contrivance? 

[sorentoft]

Someone With Mass wrote...

I hope they can come up with something better than squadmate VS race, because that will get old. Not to mention that I find it very unbelievable if I have to make such a choice. That they're just doing it to annoy me.

Indeed. I actually think that they did Suicide Mission right here. If you make stupid choices your people will die - put that in the base game. Unavoidable deaths are boring as hell.

[Wulfram]

jamesp81 wrote...

Shepard having a snowball's chance in hell of stopping the Collectors with one ship and a crew of 12 operatives is an enormous contrivance itself.  So is Shepard and 6 other operatives surviving being in the same star system with Sovereign for more than 10 minutes.

By your definitions, the entire series is one massive contrivance of unlikely ass whooping.  Which I'm OK with.

So am I.  It therefore comes down to what makes a better story.

[Tasha vas Nar Rayya]

AngusJimiKeith wrote...

I couldn't agree more. Screw "realism." The real world is a s***hole. I don't need a virtual s***hole to remind me of the real s***hole I live in.

 And that is why I spend my time on RPG's. (And Team Fortress 2)

[Someone With Mass]

sorentoft wrote...
Indeed. I actually think that they did Suicide Mission right here. If you make stupid choices your people will die - put that in the base game. Unavoidable deaths are boring as hell.

Feels stupid when the game has to resort to the old Batman scenario, where you have to save either your partner or your love as well.

[BatmanPWNS]

If the reapers won't help me with my pro-human quest then I guess I'll do it personally. (Feel very pro-human lately)

[Killjoy Cutter]

Someone With Mass wrote...

sorentoft wrote...
Indeed. I actually think that they did Suicide Mission right here. If you make stupid choices your people will die - put that in the base game. Unavoidable deaths are boring as hell.

Feels stupid when the game has to resort to the old Batman scenario, where you have to save either your partner or your love as well.

Indeed, on both counts. 

[JeffZero]

Everyone who wants the happiest possible ending should be given the option to obtain it.

I'm not one of them but they shouldn't be denied.

[Teredan]

The way the endings should be achieved should be somewhat akin to heavy rain where you don't know how your decision affect it. The problem for ME2 was that the paragon/renegade system pretty much killed that ambiguity. You always no what the "good" decision is.

[sorentoft]

Killjoy Cutter wrote...

Someone With Mass wrote...

sorentoft wrote...
Indeed. I actually think that they did Suicide Mission right here. If you make stupid choices your people will die - put that in the base game. Unavoidable deaths are boring as hell.

Feels stupid when the game has to resort to the old Batman scenario, where you have to save either your partner or your love as well.

Indeed, on both counts. 

Indeed.

[JeffZero]

I'm just glad there are a few "well, they're not great decisions but I can justify them" decisions in the Suicide Mission for folks like me who enjoy meta-ing a bit there and only there so as to walk out of that place with a few scars.

Zaeed leading the second fire team, for example. Sure, if you really think about it the fact that he seems to be the sole survivor of a lot of his stories should tell ya something. But it isn't too hard to ignore that if you want a casualty.

[AdmiralCheez]

JeffZero wrote...

I'm just glad there are a few "well, they're not great decisions but I can justify them" decisions in the Suicide Mission for folks like me who enjoy meta-ing a bit there and only there so as to walk out of that place with a few scars.

Zaeed leading the second fire team, for example. Sure, if you really think about it the fact that he seems to be the sole survivor of a lot of his stories should tell ya something. But it isn't too hard to ignore that if you want a casualty.

I just thought of another one:

Having Jacob create the biotic barrier.

Seriously, he actually has it as a power, and as a soldier he has a lot of stamina.  Jack is strong, but she's not exactly dependable, and Samara's powers are more offensive in nature.  And if you've got Morinth, well, I wouldn't trust her, either.