4309 réponses à ce sujet

[AdmiralCheez]

Golden Owl wrote...

I understand what your saying Cheez....but I think still a point though.

It is.  The supposed emotional impact of Arrival fell flat on its face due to poor presentation and the fact that pretty much nobody likes batarians.

[Dean_the_Young]

Imagine if Arrival had been played with Shepard not fighting indoctrinated Alliance soldiers, but Batarian Special Response commandos sent to stop the asteroid? Shepard's role isn't in restarting the project: Shepard is fighting dozens of people who are trying to stop a massacre. When Shepard is the agent of destruction, the role changes.

We could even have had a clearly sympathetic Batarian try and reason with Shepard throughout the fighting. Nods to Bring Down the Sky, appeals to backstory (this won't bring back your parents, Colonist!), and just about every reasonable appeal from someone who doesn't believe that the Reapers will be here right now, in three hours, if we don't blow up a populated planet immediately.

[SlottsMachine]

Lizardviking wrote...

And who says it has to be one certain squadmate. Have one squadmate always die, but who dies is up to you.

As long as I get to choose who dies out of everyone, then I don't really have a problem with character death. Because for me even then there would be no easy decisions. I'm just not a fan of having choices forced on me. 

[SlottsMachine]

Me too.

[Dean_the_Young]

jreezy wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Imagine if Arrival had been played with Shepard not fighting indoctrinated Alliance soldiers, but Batarian Special Response commandos sent to stop the asteroid? Shepard's role isn't in restarting the project: Shepard is fighting dozens of people who are trying to stop a massacre. When Shepard is the agent of destruction, the role changes.

We could even have had a clearly sympathetic Batarian try and reason with Shepard throughout the fighting. Nods to Bring Down the Sky, appeals to backstory (this won't bring back your parents, Colonist!), and just about every reasonable appeal from someone who doesn't believe that the Reapers will be here right now, in three hours, if we don't blow up a populated planet immediately.

I now wish Arrival played out like this.

I have that effect on people.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Imagine if Arrival had been played with Shepard not fighting indoctrinated Alliance soldiers, but Batarian Special Response commandos sent to stop the asteroid? Shepard's role isn't in restarting the project: Shepard is fighting dozens of people who are trying to stop a massacre. When Shepard is the agent of destruction, the role changes.

We could even have had a clearly sympathetic Batarian try and reason with Shepard throughout the fighting. Nods to Bring Down the Sky, appeals to backstory (this won't bring back your parents, Colonist!), and just about every reasonable appeal from someone who doesn't believe that the Reapers will be here right now, in three hours, if we don't blow up a populated planet immediately.

That would have been much better than what we had.

[Medhia Nox]

@Dean_The_Young: Even if it doesn't convince them... and it would be so doubtful that it would. Could you at least plead your case - explain why you have to? ((I suppose only a paragon would even bother - given Renegade's "Who gives a ****." mentality))

One of these events - one of these "no win" scenarios is fine... the more of them you add, the more your audience will disconnect.

A Song of Ice and Fire series by George R.R. Martin is a good example of "some" of this. Those characters are in a constant state of losing - and, by book 4 a great many of his readers have checked out. (not to mention the fact that he completely switches his cast)

While I'll read book 5 and on purely for his well written characters - I find it to be a boring aspect of the book that he has to cram how bleak everything is down your throat every five minutes. Honestly - even though I know that, even in his books, good will win - by book seven (the last in the series) I'm not sure I'll care anymore.

===

As far as ME goes - we've got out 300,000 Batarians dead. Fine - good, now lets solve some problems - namely, the Reapers.

Note: You don't think a pleading Batarian would be as heavy handed as Morinth killing an innocent young artist girl?

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 13 octobre 2011 - 11:01 .

[Prince Zeel]

OH FK this topic. I've seen a many of insightful discussions locked because it's gone on "too long" and that was 6 pages. This sh#t needs to be shut down. NOW.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Medhia Nox wrote...
One of these events - one of these "no win" scenarios is fine... the more of them you add, the more your audience will disconnect.

A Song of Ice and Fire series by George R.R. Martin is a good example of "some" of this. Those characters are in a constant state of losing - and, by book 4 a great many of his readers have checked out. (not to mention the fact that he completely switches his cast)

While I'll read book 5 and on purely for his well written characters - I find it to be a boring aspect of the book that he has to cram how bleak everything is down your throat every five minutes. Honestly - even though I know that, even in his books, good will win - by book seven (the last in the series) I'm not sure I'll care anymore.

I don¨t think anyone is asking for it to happen 5 times in ME3, just once. Considering that the last time you faced a no-win scenario where something personal was at stake was Virmire. I would say the distance between these two event are distant enough that they don¨t cause grimdark-fatigue.

[onelifecrisis]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Imagine if Arrival had been played with Shepard not fighting indoctrinated Alliance soldiers, but Batarian Special Response commandos sent to stop the asteroid? Shepard's role isn't in restarting the project: Shepard is fighting dozens of people who are trying to stop a massacre. When Shepard is the agent of destruction, the role changes.

We could even have had a clearly sympathetic Batarian try and reason with Shepard throughout the fighting. Nods to Bring Down the Sky, appeals to backstory (this won't bring back your parents, Colonist!), and just about every reasonable appeal from someone who doesn't believe that the Reapers will be here right now, in three hours, if we don't blow up a populated planet immediately.

That would have been a lot better.

[AdmiralCheez]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Failure that is unavoidable, and failure that is easily and obviously avoidable, are two different forms of tragedy.

The difference between the two is that one is a plot device, therefore isn't really your fault, therefore you don't blame yourself, therefore you get pissed off at other people instead of feeling guilty.

For example, choosing to let the Council die after I saved them three times in a row:
SH*T F*CK OH MY GOD THEY'RE JUST FLYING BY AND LETTING THEM ALL GET 
BOMBARDED THIS IS AWFUL I TAKE IT BACK SAVE THEM SAVE THEM DAMMIT 
DON'T RELOAD DON'T RELOAD DON'T RELOAD BE A MAN DON'T RELOAD F*CK SH*T SH*T.

Versus Virmire: Oh ffs plot get a life why do I have to do this god damn it Kaidan it's your turn.

In a Mass Effect context, however, the choice would be like this:

You can fight the battle and be wiped out and fail.

Or

You can fight the battle and be wiped out and be victorious.

These are not equally weighty alternatives when both are possible. Selective failure is not weighty.

I have no idea what you are saying here.  Like, it's not a failure if Grunt lives?  Because the point I was making was that named characters don't have to die to create loss and drama.  I'm not sure what your angle is here.

This would be a good scenario... but then, this isn't the sort of survival most people protest either.

If keeping your love interest alive meant the love interest's enduring disgust and hate for you, that would be well done. Bioware almost, almost came this way with the Virmire Survivor: I would have loved had, if you saved the one you were romancing and then said you did it for them, they slapped you and broke the romance.

But what we're still getting here is loss. What's lost isn't the LI's life, but it is your connection and relationship with him/her. That's the sort of thing people like myself would enjoy. You aren't ****ing inconsequential things over and still getting the love.

However, mandatorily not being able to romance stuff is also kind of stupid and forced.  I don't expect them to be okay with it, certainly, and an epic why-the-hell-would-you-do-something-so-stupid-never-let-how-you-feel-get-in-the-way-again sort of fight would be awesome, but there should be the option to make up over it later.  The Aliiance, however, could think you're a f*cktard no matter what, and the Very Important Plot Device will be guaranteed to f*ck everyone's sh*t up later, possibly meaning someone else dies and you may have no control over it (DELAYED STEALTH VIRMIRE).

I mean, come on, space operas need lovey-dovey, right?

I thought you were going to say the paragon interrupt was to drink poison before Juliet wakes up.

No, that's the dumbf*ck emo kid interrupt.

Seriously, though, there should be one or two interrupts in there that bite you in the ass, on both sides.  We're so well-trained to always do quick-time events it's ridiculous.  Time to re-wire our Skinner boxes, don't you think?

[onelifecrisis]

Prince Zeel wrote...

OH FK this topic. I've seen a many of insightful discussions locked because it's gone on "too long" and that was 6 pages. This sh#t needs to be shut down. NOW.

The OP is a girl who needs help. And this is the internet.

[JeffZero]

Let me kill them.

[AdmiralCheez]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Imagine if Arrival had been played with Shepard not fighting indoctrinated Alliance soldiers, but Batarian Special Response commandos sent to stop the asteroid? Shepard's role isn't in restarting the project: Shepard is fighting dozens of people who are trying to stop a massacre. When Shepard is the agent of destruction, the role changes.

We could even have had a clearly sympathetic Batarian try and reason with Shepard throughout the fighting. Nods to Bring Down the Sky, appeals to backstory (this won't bring back your parents, Colonist!), and just about every reasonable appeal from someone who doesn't believe that the Reapers will be here right now, in three hours, if we don't blow up a populated planet immediately.

That would have kicked ass.

Damn it, Arrival, why u written so sh*tty?

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Prince Zeel wrote...

OH FK this topic. I've seen a many of insightful discussions locked because it's gone on "too long" and that was 6 pages. This sh#t needs to be shut down. NOW.

Whats the matter? People are discussing story elements.

[JeffZero]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Imagine if Arrival had been played with Shepard not fighting indoctrinated Alliance soldiers, but Batarian Special Response commandos sent to stop the asteroid? Shepard's role isn't in restarting the project: Shepard is fighting dozens of people who are trying to stop a massacre. When Shepard is the agent of destruction, the role changes.

We could even have had a clearly sympathetic Batarian try and reason with Shepard throughout the fighting. Nods to Bring Down the Sky, appeals to backstory (this won't bring back your parents, Colonist!), and just about every reasonable appeal from someone who doesn't believe that the Reapers will be here right now, in three hours, if we don't blow up a populated planet immediately.

That would have kicked ass.

Damn it, Arrival, why u written so sh*tty?

Yes, I must concur. That is a much better spin on Arrival. I've thought about fighting batarians and the moral implication that pins down on Shepard before too.

[Medhia Nox]

@Lizardviking - Oh, I don't mind Virmire, and I don't mind Arrival, and I do like Dean_The_Young's ideas, but that doesn't mean I feel we "need" one (or more) in ME 3 to make it feel important or dangerous.

Note: I won't cry about one in ME 3 either - they just don't do anything for me.

When I can't control something no matter what - I simply have conviction to carry through. Not some self-doubt about "Oh, wouldn't it be nice if..." because there was no if. There was only: "Destroy 300,000 Batarians".

Modifié par Medhia Nox, 13 octobre 2011 - 11:11 .

[Eyerock]

Here's a nifty idea for a possible death scene!

During the mission with Thane where the goal is to free the hanar scientists, you get hold of the untested prototype of a cure for Kepral syndrome.
At the final part of this mission the player's objective is to bring the cure safely back to the normandy, who will ship it to a secure hanar research-facility. At the end Thane's condition gets worse and he collapses, dying from suffocation. You now have two options: Let your trusted friend and companion/lover Thane die and save the cure for the hanar facility, or use the cure to save Thane's life, setting the hanar's research back several years and possibly dooming other drell suffering from this disease.

Maybe I derailed a bit here, but I'm not sure what we're discussing anyway!

[Someone With Mass]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

That would have kicked ass.

Damn it, Arrival, why u written so sh*tty?

Another studio, I'd guess.

Can't really kill any other race without having bad consequences in ME3.

But hey, at least the blinks were the first ones to go in this cycle.

Modifié par Someone With Mass, 13 octobre 2011 - 11:15 .

[Medhia Nox]

If you wanted to give Arrival even more weight - I think it should have been a colony of humans, or the Hanar homeworld with the Drell on it - why not destroy someone's homeworld AND send a species into extinction.

Honestly - if we're going for the "tough" choice (which wasn't a choice at all) - then take away the easy to hate race.

[nelly21]

Someone With Mass wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

That would have kicked ass.

Damn it, Arrival, why u written so sh*tty?

Another studio, I'd guess.

Can't really kill any other race without having bad consequences in ME3.

But hey, at least the blinks were the first ones to go in this cycle.

Seriously, I don't know what it is, but I fracking HATE batarians. I mean I know Arrival wasn't good, but I enjoyed seeing that little blip disappear on the map.

Ima Baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad man!

Modifié par nelly21, 13 octobre 2011 - 11:20 .

[Dean_the_Young]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

Failure that is unavoidable, and failure that is easily and obviously avoidable, are two different forms of tragedy.

The difference between the two is that one is a plot device, therefore isn't really your fault, therefore you don't blame yourself, therefore you get pissed off at other people instead of feeling guilty.

For example, choosing to let the Council die after I saved them three times in a row:
SH*T F*CK OH MY GOD THEY'RE JUST FLYING BY AND LETTING THEM ALL GET 
BOMBARDED THIS IS AWFUL I TAKE IT BACK SAVE THEM SAVE THEM DAMMIT 
DON'T RELOAD DON'T RELOAD DON'T RELOAD BE A MAN DON'T RELOAD F*CK SH*T SH*T.

Versus Virmire: Oh ffs plot get a life why do I have to do this god damn it Kaidan it's your turn.

The thing is, I disagree. I don't feel guilty about having to leave a Virmire survivor to die at all, therefore the other emotions can have weight. Best of all possible worlds.

Whereas while I (don't) feel guilty about the Council, in ME2 there was a rather heavy-handed 'better' and 'worse' treatment for saving them or not, even though leaving them to die was well called for at the end of ME1.

I have no idea what you are saying here.  Like, it's not a failure if Grunt lives?  Because the point I was making was that named characters don't have to die to create loss and drama.  I'm not sure what your angle is here.

When the death of a character is optional-failure like in the suicide mission, it really has less weight than an absolute-scripted death. Having someone die at just about any phase is because you chose the 'bad' option, while there was a 'good' option. About the only place where a death is beyond clear-control is the Hold the Line score... and that kills poor Mordin for no clear or dramatic reason at all.

However, mandatorily not being able to romance stuff is also kind of stupid and forced.  I don't expect them to be okay with it, certainly, and an epic why-the-hell-would-you-do-something-so-stupid-never-let-how-you-feel-get-in-the-way-again sort of fight would be awesome, but there should be the option to make up over it later.  The Aliiance, however, could think you're a f*cktard no matter what, and the Very Important Plot Device will be guaranteed to f*ck everyone's sh*t up later, possibly meaning someone else dies and you may have no control over it (DELAYED STEALTH VIRMIRE).

The problem you come to with this is Bioware's capability for actually having a good reconciliation sub-plot. Which is, in my estimation, low.

The reason why 'random strangers versus your love interest' delimmas rarely work is because, well, when you can keep your love interest (and that includes a love-redemption), very few people care about who gets the shaft even if they 'lost' the mission. Kelly Chambers dying has more weight than Horizon Colonist dying because one is personal and the other is, well, not.

I mean, come on, space operas need lovey-dovey, right?

I prefer my space operas like I prefer my Gundam anime: with lots of angst and a bloody victory in which only a few survive.

I might not be the best opinion.

Seriously, though, there should be one or two interrupts in there that bite you in the ass, on both sides.  We're so well-trained to always do quick-time events it's ridiculous.  Time to re-wire our Skinner boxes, don't you think?

I support the Conrad Verner interrupt.

If the player presses the interrupt, Conrad Verner comes out, kicks ass, and makes explosions... and Shepard breaks the fourth wall to look at the camera and go 'wtf'?