4309 réponses à ce sujet

[Wulfram]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

I don't understand how you CAN lose him. Seriously, on my first playthrough I breezed right through that, wondering how exactly you're supposed to lose him.

If you treat the pursuit of Saren as an actual race against time you've got a pretty decent chance of losing him.  Since you'll be fairly low level and thus not have loads of points in Charm/Intimidate, and probably won't have seen finding his armour as a priority.

[Computer_God91]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Computer_God91 wrote...

I think I figured it out. How I could come to a compromise with a "happy ending"'s existence and I not pick it and have the game my way. The only way the happy ending can happen is to do something I can't accept. That I'll refuse, not because I don't want a happy ending, but because the happy ending comes at a cost I deem to high. Like DA:O's Dark Ritual ending or Loghain redemption ending. That way other people that can accept such a cost can and I can easily reject it and be 100% satisfied with my ending.

That would be fine, but it has to be a real, clear cost.  Not something completely vague like the Old God baby.  I mean, I don't know if that thing is good, evil, or something else.  I have no idea what I'm agreeing to, so therefore I couldn't even properly consider the option.

That's why I always rejected it. I have no information about it so I don't want to risk whatever that god child might be. Especially coming from Morrigan. So if they had a vague choice like this in ME3 I'd easily be able to reject it.

[Dean_the_Young]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

The thing about Wrex is that you have to avoid the left-side of the dialogue wheel, where the 'persuade Wrex' options are.

If you stick to the right-hand side, he dies. If you go left, he lives. It's not actually Paragon/Renegade, though many people think it is.

I see. Yeah, I remember one time saving him without using a Par/Ren option...I think...Isn't there a middle one?

If you got Wrex his family armor back, you can save him without Par/Ren.


Of course, if you didn't, and you don't have the Par/Ren, there's nothing else you can do to save him.

[Dean_the_Young]

JeffZero wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

And let me say, having people talk about a post of mine (and even defending it) nearly a dozen pages later is quite flattering.

For providing me with another fairly reasonable avenue for my discussed-to-death motivation for getting a couple of squadmates offed in the Suicide Mission pretty routinely, you totally deserve the praise.

Oh.

Just noticed this, and, well...

Oh.

Thanks. Thank you.

[Yezdigerd]

Must be a painful for the "realists" to play Mass Effect when the squad mates constantly revives out of combat. No wonder the Lazarus project didn't make more of an impact. Two years to get up on your feet? You wuss!

[wright1978]

GeneralSlotts193 wrote...

A question for those that what deaths to be mandatory. Do you guys consider the Wrex situation from ME1 to be a fail option death or to be a role playing tough choices death?

It is obviously a fail option death as once again it is completely undone by completionism. Getting his family armor makes it incredibly easy to keep him alive.  Also there's no consequences. Killing him just loses you a character.

[onelifecrisis]

jreezy wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

It is mutually exclusive.
I never read any walktroughs or anything, and I never lost anyone in the SM.
Not to mantion that SM is a very bad example, because the loyality mission mechanic made no sense at all.

It made sense from a game design standpoint, if a bit redundant.

I want to play a completionist, make smart, rational choices...and still not not be able to save everyone.

I understand the need for loss and drama, but I still find this standpoint to be a bit silly.  "I want to do everything as well as I possibly can and not be rewarded for it."  Eh... what?

Maybe loss is the reward for him. That is understandable.

I guess that was a joke?

@Cheez

Victory is the reward.

Hard to find the right words here but let me try...

Success without sacrifice is, arguably, a succcess of no value. Either the thing achieved was incredibly easy to achieve (and the success therefore has no value) or it was achieved through excessive luck (and therefore, again, it has no value). Some people want to feel that their success in ME3 will be a hard-earned, valuable success, and the only valuable successes are the ones that required some kind of sacrifice.

I'm not entirely happy with that wording so let me know if it made any sense.

Modifié par onelifecrisis, 14 octobre 2011 - 07:51 .

[JeffZero]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

JeffZero wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

And let me say, having people talk about a post of mine (and even defending it) nearly a dozen pages later is quite flattering.

For providing me with another fairly reasonable avenue for my discussed-to-death motivation for getting a couple of squadmates offed in the Suicide Mission pretty routinely, you totally deserve the praise.

Oh.

Just noticed this, and, well...

Oh.

Thanks. Thank you.

[onelifecrisis]

jreezy wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

jreezy wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

It is mutually exclusive.
I never read any walktroughs or anything, and I never lost anyone in the SM.
Not to mantion that SM is a very bad example, because the loyality mission mechanic made no sense at all.

It made sense from a game design standpoint, if a bit redundant.

I want to play a completionist, make smart, rational choices...and still not not be able to save everyone.

I understand the need for loss and drama, but I still find this standpoint to be a bit silly.  "I want to do everything as well as I possibly can and not be rewarded for it."  Eh... what?

Maybe loss is the reward for him. That is understandable.

I guess that was a joke?

Since you seem to think it was I'll assume you didn't get what I meant.

No I didn't. Sorry it just wasn't very clear. You have to admit that "loss as a reward" isn't exactly self-explanatory.

Modifié par onelifecrisis, 14 octobre 2011 - 07:58 .

[Athayniel]

onelifecrisis wrote...

I guess that was a joke?

@Cheez

Victory is the reward.

Hard to find the right words here but let me try...

Success without sacrifice is, arguably, a succcess of no value. Either the thing achieved was incredibly easy to achieve (and the success therefore has no value) or it was achieved through excessive luck (and therefore, again, it has no value). Some people want to feel that their success in ME3 will be a hard-earned, valuable success, and the only valuable successes are the ones that required some kind of sacrifice.

I'm not entirely happy with that wording so let me know if it made any sense.

Wait. So... Shepard finds a way to defeat the reapers, an entire race of colossal robots who have locked the entire galaxy in a cycle of genocide for at least 37 million years, and in the current cycle have already nearly destroyed the space faring races of the galaxy twice with the Rachni Wars and Sovereign's attack on the Citadel and who have killed millions of people already just on Earth. If Shepard accomplishes this task but somehow manages to keep his squad of twenty or so elite soldiers, specialists and biotics alive, then this monumental victory has no value? This victory that has saved the entire galaxy has no value...

Right... not surprised you're not happy with the wording.

Modifié par Athayniel, 14 octobre 2011 - 08:01 .

[AdmiralCheez]

onelifecrisis wrote...

Victory is the reward.

Hard to find the right words here but let me try...

Success without sacrifice is, arguably, a succcess of no value. Either the thing achieved was incredibly easy to achieve (and the success therefore has no value) or it was achieved through excessive luck (and therefore, again, it has no value). Some people want to feel that their success in ME3 will be a hard-earned, valuable success, and the only valuable successes are the ones that required some kind of sacrifice.

I'm not entirely happy with that wording so let me know if it made any sense.

It did, and it's a legitimate point.  But I like to think working one's ass off should be rewarded, too.  Sometimes effort in and of itself is a sacrifice.

I mean, it's not like there's a god perched on a mountaintop demanding a blood sacrifice.

[AdmiralCheez]

jreezy wrote...

Lotion wants to lose squadmates in Mass Effect 3 no matter how good a job he does. In a supposed war story like Mass Effect 3 inevitable loss would probably be it's own reward.

I don't know.  I get sort of a rebellious glee from taking standard literary tropes and pissing on them.

Dramatic war story, eh?  Time to break out love and peace, everybody.  We will win by being NICE PEOPLE!  AHAHAHAHAAHAAAA!

[onelifecrisis]

Athayniel wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

I guess that was a joke?

@Cheez

Victory is the reward.

Hard to find the right words here but let me try...

Success without sacrifice is, arguably, a succcess of no value. Either the thing achieved was incredibly easy to achieve (and the success therefore has no value) or it was achieved through excessive luck (and therefore, again, it has no value). Some people want to feel that their success in ME3 will be a hard-earned, valuable success, and the only valuable successes are the ones that required some kind of sacrifice.

I'm not entirely happy with that wording so let me know if it made any sense.

Wait. So... Shepard finds a way to defeat the reapers, an entire race of colossal robots who have locked the entire galaxy in a cycle of genocide for at least 37 million years, and in the current cycle have already nearly destroyed the space faring races of the galaxy twice with the Rachni Wars and Sovereign's attack on the Citadel and who have killed millions of people already just on Earth. If Shepard accomplishes this task but somehow manages to keep his squad of twenty or so elite soldiers, specialists and biotics alive, then this monumental victory has no value? This victory that has saved the entire galaxy has no value...

Right... not surprised you're not happy with the wording.

My vocabulary might not be up to this challenge but again I'll try. Maybe some of the brighter sparks here will get what I'm trying to say and help out.

"This victory that has saved the entire galaxy has no value..."

Shepards efforts and success have no value in themselves if they were not difficult to achieve. The value of their external effects are easy to see, as you have pointed out, but they arguably do not represent an accomplishment/achievement for Shepard.

Edit:
It should also be noted that many of the things that would be sacrifices IRL don't translate well into the game. Characters we care about are one of the few things that do translate.

Modifié par onelifecrisis, 14 octobre 2011 - 08:12 .

[onelifecrisis]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Sometimes effort in and of itself is a sacrifice.

As I said in response to... that other guy... not all sacrifices translate well between RL and the game. Shepard might be getting only 2 hours of sleep per day for all we know. That's a sacrifice, of sorts, but it's not one that the player feels.

I'm not saying that the player should make sacrifices or that the game should somehow become a reality. I'm saying that the player needs to see that Shepard has made sacrifices. I suppose the game could just say it somewhere by having a character comment that Shepard has not had any sleep or something, but you have to admit that would be kind of lame.

Modifié par onelifecrisis, 14 octobre 2011 - 08:17 .

[Athayniel]

onelifecrisis wrote...

My vocabulary might not be up to this challenge but again I'll try. Maybe some of the brighter sparks here will get what I'm trying to say and help out.

"This victory that has saved the entire galaxy has no value..."

Shepards efforts and success have no value in themselves if they were not difficult to achieve. The value of their external effects are easy to see, as you have pointed out, but they arguably do not represent an accomplishment/achievement for Shepard.

I really don't think you can say that. On any of those points. That Shepard's efforts have no value in themselves, or that victory will somehow be easy to achieve or that Shepard won't consider it an accomplishment. I don't think any of those things are even remotely true.

I understand you want to say that a victory easily gained is not truly earned but that's something you say about football games, not wars against genocidal robots who have already killed millions of sentients.

[onelifecrisis]

Athayniel wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

My vocabulary might not be up to this challenge but again I'll try. Maybe some of the brighter sparks here will get what I'm trying to say and help out.

"This victory that has saved the entire galaxy has no value..."

Shepards efforts and success have no value in themselves if they were not difficult to achieve. The value of their external effects are easy to see, as you have pointed out, but they arguably do not represent an accomplishment/achievement for Shepard.

I really don't think you can say that. On any of those points. That Shepard's efforts have no value in themselves, or that victory will somehow be easy to achieve or that Shepard won't consider it an accomplishment. I don't think any of those things are even remotely true.

I understand you want to say that a victory easily gained is not truly earned but that's something you say about football games, not wars against genocidal robots who have already killed millions of sentients.

I was just trying to explain why I think some people would prefer to have sacrifice in the game. It gives weight to the achievement and shows that Shepard has been truly tested. I'm not insisting you like it, I'm just offering a way for you to understand it.

[Kaiser Shepard]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

A somewhat juvenile analogy of what onelifecrisis might be this:

Many kids have allowances. Many kids also just ask their parents for things, and their parents by them whatever they want. When this happens, the kids don't learn the value of what they have: they often trash their things, and discard them to have mummy and daddy give them something new in a few weeks. Having an allowance, possibly (wouldn't know myself as I never had one) might help this. Parents not giving their kids ANY money for sure helps this: My parents never gave me any money, and very rarely bought me what I "wanted." I had to scrounge for while to get the next computer game or whatever I wanted. Having to work, having to "give" a little (by working) to "get" a little, taught me the value of things.

The same way that having the player "give" a little (by losing squadmates) to "get" a little (win the war) could possibly have more meaning than having an easy ending given to you.

That's what I think he's saying, anyway.

So, you're saying the ones wanting everyone to live were (are?) spoiled brats who always got everything, whereas the more realistic part of the fanbase has learnt the true value of things the hard way? Works for me, as most of these spineless Paragons lack any character anyway.

[Athayniel]

onelifecrisis wrote...

I was just trying to explain why I think some people would prefer to have sacrifice in the game. It gives weight to the achievement and shows that Shepard has been truly tested. I'm not insisting you like it, I'm just offering a way for you to understand it.

Hmmm, I get what you're saying, but in this case their position is that if a little drama is good then a lot of drama is better. Coupled with the belief that you can never have too much drama.