4309 réponses à ce sujet

[onelifecrisis]

Oh, goody...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

No, because it appears we are the minority when it comes to this issue, hence why having the game be a road fo hardships wouldn't be fanservice. Granted, it might be servicing the fans in giving them  the best product possible, instead of the one they think they want, but it's most definitely not fanservice.

Either way, it's pandering to a vocal group.  Ergo, vanservice.  How many of you there are doesn't matter.  Pretty sure the majority of players weren't demanding a f*ckable Garrus, but look what happened.

THERE IS NO ESCAPE.

Erhm, no. There wasn't a large naive majorty against Garrus being an LI.

I'm sure someone like you can see what's wrong with that argument.

Wanting Garrus to be an LI and not being against it are two separate things.

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

AdmiralCheez wrote...
However, doing the same thing over and over lacks innovation.  Creativity stagnates.

So repreating the same trick the the last game did is so much more awesome? :innocent:

[Lotion Soronarr]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Am I moved when I see real tragedies? Yes, because it is real people out there. But in a story? Then you need more than just random bystander #33 for me to be truly moved.

Not me.  I just have to see the pain and the struggle.  I want to protect and avenge random bystander #33 just as much as Kaishley Willenko.  Suffering doesn't need a name or a backstory.  Just a face.  But then again, not everyone is a goddamn bleeding heart like me.

You expect me to belive that?

If Garrus and a random bystander have the same worth and emotional impact to you, then why aren't you demanding no mandatory death for random citizen #56?

Because they don't. You know it's the truth.
It's not the same.

[Nashiktal]

Athayniel wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

But what would have been solved if Chewie or C-3PO or R2 died?  Would the story somehow be more valuable?

Do you know what they did to Chewie in the EU?

How does that pertain to the films? If garrus dies in the ME EU it would hold no bearing on the origional trilogy.

[Ziggy]

Have all the sadness and tragedy you like during the beginning and middle of the story, just give it a happy ending.

Reminds me of a study I read in the paper years ago.... *google search*

Here it is:

"Forty-one per cent [of respondents] are overwhelmingly in favour of books with a happy ending, as against 2.2% who like it sad. Women were 13% more likely than men to say they want it all to end happily. Almost one fifth of men expressed a preference for books with ambiguous endings…

Young people were most likely to prefer books with a sad ending – 8.6% of under 16s. Those aged 41-65, however, a group with more personal experience of sadness, dislike sad endings, with only 1.1% preferring books that end this way."

ref: http://www.guardian....books.booksnews

Modifié par Em23, 14 octobre 2011 - 10:29 .

[onelifecrisis]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

If Garrus and a random bystander have the same worth and emotional impact to you, then why aren't you demanding no mandatory death for random citizen #56?

That was awesome. Sorry Cheez but you just got owned.

[Kaiser Shepard]

onelifecrisis wrote...

Oh, goody...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

No, because it appears we are the minority when it comes to this issue, hence why having the game be a road fo hardships wouldn't be fanservice. Granted, it might be servicing the fans in giving them  the best product possible, instead of the one they think they want, but it's most definitely not fanservice.

Either way, it's pandering to a vocal group.  Ergo, vanservice.  How many of you there are doesn't matter.  Pretty sure the majority of players weren't demanding a f*ckable Garrus, but look what happened.

THERE IS NO ESCAPE.

Erhm, no. There wasn't a large naive majorty against Garrus being an LI.

I'm sure someone like you can see what's wrong with that argument.

Wanting Garrus to be an LI and not being against it are two separate things.

And people either wanted it, or didn't care, yet there wasn't much of a crowd against it.

Lizardviking wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...
It's the first or second thing up there when you Google his name.

Erhhmm which blog is it exactly? He has alot of them on the site.

The top one.

[Lotion Soronarr]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

A good moment indeed but with Cheez in charge that moment wouldn't have happened.

Bullsh*t.  War isn't a box of kittens.  Stop acting like I don't know that.

But it's proof that you can have drama through environment, which was one of the points I was making.

Squadmates are part of the enviroment.

[AdmiralCheez]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

You expect me to belive that?

If Garrus and a random bystander have the same worth and emotional impact to you, then why aren't you demanding no mandatory death for random citizen #56?

Because they don't. You know it's the truth.
It's not the same.

Clarification: the death of innocents is motivation enough, especially if it's all up in my face.  I don't need anything extra on top of that for the story to have weight.

"Oh, let's kill all your friends, too" is just frustrating and taking the fun out of the game.  There needs to be positive to balance the negative, little victories and broments to encourage the player to keep going.  Pissing them off and taking out the fun, happy stuff kills replayability.

No more bromance, no point in continuing, because it's what makes the game enjoyable for me.

[Athayniel]

Nashiktal wrote...

How does that pertain to the films? If garrus dies in the ME EU it would hold no bearing on the origional trilogy.

Because it holds to the conversation at hand about cliche and tropes etc.

[Medhia Nox]

@Em23: Interesting - because the grim/dark has always said "younger" to me.

I truly think it has a lot to do with the anger and confusion of youth (I'm unhappy - so everything is ****!) - which, of course - has now been stretched into the 20s here in the U.S.

I've seen the good guys win - I've been the good guy from time to time, and I've won the day - the world is an amazingly wonderful place, it's the people in it that can make it ****.

So no, I don't need grim/dark every minute of the day just to feel like my story is grown up.

There must be both - or the story feels trite and contrived (to me).

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...
The top one.

Mississippi personhood amendment?

[Computer_God91]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

But you do act like you don't know that.

I'm arguing for a small point of comfort in an otherwise miserable sh*tstorm of grimdark so the damn thing's not unbearable.

I don't find Mass Effect unbearable at all. I did find something that made me happy though. I say good.

Modifié par Computer_God91, 14 octobre 2011 - 10:38 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Tropes are not bad.
It's a common trope because it's true to life and it works.

You can call it cheap and easy all you want - it's not really.

However, doing the same thing over and over lacks innovation.  Creativity stagnates.

Same holds true for your prefered approach. Avoiding death is just as much of a cliche and uninovative as death is.

[AdmiralCheez]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Squadmates are part of the enviroment.

To you, maybe.  I like to think of them as more than just set pieces and plot devices.

[AdmiralCheez]

Em23 wrote...

Have all the sadness and tragedy you like during the beginning and middle of the story, just give it a happy ending.

Reminds me of a study I read in the paper years ago.... *google search*

Here it is:

"Forty-one per cent [of respondents] are overwhelmingly in favour of books with a happy ending, as against 2.2% who like it sad. Women were 13% more likely than men to say they want it all to end happily. Almost one fifth of men expressed a preference for books with ambiguous endings…

Young people were most likely to prefer books with a sad ending – 8.6% of under 16s. Those aged 41-65, however, a group with more personal experience of sadness, dislike sad endings, with only 1.1% preferring books that end this way."

ref: http://www.guardian....books.booksnews

There goes the "more maturity in the story" argument.

[Nashiktal]

What the one about miscarriage women being made criminals?

[AdmiralCheez]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Same holds true for your prefered approach. Avoiding death is just as much of a cliche and uninovative as death is.

Not in a mature war story.

[Kaiser Shepard]

Lizardviking wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...
The top one.

Mississippi personhood amendment?

Do you see another one at the top?

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Squadmates are part of the enviroment.

To you, maybe.  I like to think of them as more than just set pieces and plot devices.

Set pieces and plot devices are also part of the enviroment.

[Kaiser Shepard]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Same holds true for your prefered approach. Avoiding death is just as much of a cliche and uninovative as death is.

Not in a mature war story.

And there is a reason for that.

[jeweledleah]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Em23 wrote...

Have all the sadness and tragedy you like during the beginning and middle of the story, just give it a happy ending.

Reminds me of a study I read in the paper years ago.... *google search*

Here it is:

"Forty-one per cent [of respondents] are overwhelmingly in favour of books with a happy ending, as against 2.2% who like it sad. Women were 13% more likely than men to say they want it all to end happily. Almost one fifth of men expressed a preference for books with ambiguous endings…

Young people were most likely to prefer books with a sad ending – 8.6% of under 16s. Those aged 41-65, however, a group with more personal experience of sadness, dislike sad endings, with only 1.1% preferring books that end this way."

ref: http://www.guardian....books.booksnews

There goes the "more maturity in the story" argument.

my god, I so predictably fit into majority range I don't know whether to be sad or amused... or both?

[Lotion Soronarr]

Nashiktal wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...
"The protagonist's best friend dies" is a common trope in war stories, yes.  But it's not the only way to create drama.  It's the instant ramen of drama: cheap, easy, and when it's all you eat you get sick of it fast.  Creating tragedy and tension WITHOUT killing off the squad would show off incredible writing skill.

Tropes are not bad.
It's a common trope because it's true to life and it works.

You can call it cheap and easy all you want - it's not really.

Tropes are not bad, but cliche's are. In every freaking war story I watch the best friend always dies, usually in some sort of sacrifice or in a last minute saftey crunch. Not much variation.

And do you know why it's that way?
Because people in combat squads become friends fast. And people in combat squads die.

TruthInTelevision.

There isn't a single combat unit in all of history that DIDN'T suffer losses (against foes far less dangerous than the reapers)

You might as well calling equipment wtihout mantainance breaking down a cliche.

Squadmates do not need to die for their to be sacrifice and drama.

No, but they need to die to properly portray war and the gravity of the situation.
Drama can be created in other ways, but you are usually talking about another kind of drama.

Modifié par Lotion Soronnar, 14 octobre 2011 - 10:39 .

[Nashiktal]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

They've got Patrick Weekes.  Anything is possible.

I was going to say "Too bad he isn't in charge, then.", but having just read a disgusting article over at his blog, I revised my opinion.

I think I might just go with the Paragon option at the end of Mordin's mission from now on, each and every time.

Wait, so patrick not wanting women to be criminalized over miscarriages is disgusting, and somehow has bearing on how he writes for the ME series?

I am confused.

[Sgt Stryker]

Nashiktal wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

They've got Patrick Weekes.  Anything is possible.

I was going to say "Too bad he isn't in charge, then.", but having just read a disgusting article over at his blog, I revised my opinion.

I think I might just go with the Paragon option at the end of Mordin's mission from now on, each and every time.

Wait, so patrick not wanting women to be criminalized over miscarriages is disgusting, and somehow has bearing on how he writes for the ME series?

I am confused.

You're not the only one. God, I love the Deep South! [/sarcasm]

[onelifecrisis]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

Oh, goody...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

No, because it appears we are the minority when it comes to this issue, hence why having the game be a road fo hardships wouldn't be fanservice. Granted, it might be servicing the fans in giving them  the best product possible, instead of the one they think they want, but it's most definitely not fanservice.

Either way, it's pandering to a vocal group.  Ergo, vanservice.  How many of you there are doesn't matter.  Pretty sure the majority of players weren't demanding a f*ckable Garrus, but look what happened.

THERE IS NO ESCAPE.

Erhm, no. There wasn't a large naive majorty against Garrus being an LI.

I'm sure someone like you can see what's wrong with that argument.

Wanting Garrus to be an LI and not being against it are two separate things.

And people either wanted it, or didn't care, yet there wasn't much of a crowd against it.

But she didn't say there was a big crowd against it. Maybe you misread her post?