188 réponses à ce sujet

[BlueAlchemy]

DiebytheSword wrote...

Arcian wrote...

A DEM is only a DEM if it comes out of the blue in the last act of the work in question, with no previous mention or knowledge by the relevant characters. As someone who has read the spoiler leaks, I can say right away that this is not the case in ME3.

I'm glad a few people agree with me on this.  Sadly others are changing the definition of sudden.

I also agree. I believe I was being a bit vague on the original post then if you disagree. I merely hope that the (insert literary device) is not introduced over halfway through the story and extremely cheap. Unless the story is well over 40 hrs like DA:O. Then I would not mind at all 

Modifié par BlueAlchemy, 15 novembre 2011 - 11:09 .

[Blacklash93]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Arcian wrote...

A DEM is only a DEM if it comes out of the blue in the last act of the work in question, with no previous mention or knowledge by the relevant characters. As someone who has read the spoiler leaks, I can say right away that this is not the case in ME3.

Then again, you can say a lot without telling the truth or being honest to yourself and others.

That's right. Take Kaiser here, for example, who's just sore about Cerberus' portrayal and has let that poison his entire view on the game...

...See how easy that is? I can unjustly discredit others' opinions, too.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 15 novembre 2011 - 11:15 .

[psiasterisk]

DiebytheSword wrote...


A MacGuffin can be used later on in the plot, nothing pre-empts this from happening, nor does it change its status to DEM or anything else.

You´re correct about that, especially the part that DEMs are intrinsically different from MacGuffins. You could maybe construct a MacGuffin that´s also a DEM, but it would be a stretch.
Let´s say, for example, we had a story where the protagonists and the antagonists both try to acquire some sort bomb with the antagonists succeeding only to find out, while planting it to blow up some other kind of plot device, that the bomb had actually been alive and intelligent all along and sympathizing with the protagonists cause, therefore refusing to explode.

But still, not every resolution to a story is a MacGuffin. But I´ll concede, after thinking about it some more, that ME3´s resolution will actually be some sort of MacGuffin. Anything else would be a credit to the writing staff.

[BlueAlchemy]

psiasterisk wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...


A MacGuffin can be used later on in the plot, nothing pre-empts this from happening, nor does it change its status to DEM or anything else.

You´re correct about that, especially the part that DEMs are intrinsically different from MacGuffins. You could maybe construct a MacGuffin that´s also a DEM, but it would be a stretch.
Let´s say, for example, we had a story where the protagonists and the antagonists both try to acquire some sort bomb with the antagonists succeeding only to find out, while planting it to blow up some other kind of plot device, that the bomb had actually been alive and intelligent all along and sympathizing with the protagonists cause, therefore refusing to explode.

So... Raider's of the Lost Arc.

Modifié par BlueAlchemy, 15 novembre 2011 - 11:21 .

[psiasterisk]

BlueAlchemy wrote...

So... Raider's of the Lost Arc.

Haha, you´re right, I didn´t think about that.

[edit]:

Although, I don´t remember, that might have been a Chekov´s Gun and DEMs and Chekov´s Guns could be said to be mutually exclusive (CGs and MGs, however, are not).

Modifié par psiasterisk, 15 novembre 2011 - 11:30 .

[Kaiser Shepard]

Blacklash93 wrote...

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

Arcian wrote...

A DEM is only a DEM if it comes out of the blue in the last act of the work in question, with no previous mention or knowledge by the relevant characters. As someone who has read the spoiler leaks, I can say right away that this is not the case in ME3.

Then again, you can say a lot without telling the truth or being honest to yourself and others.

That's right. Take Kaiser here, for example, who's just sore about Cerberus' portrayal and has let that poison his entire view on the game...

...See how easy that is? I can unjustly discredit others' opinions, too.

Yeah, I see that you - like Arcian - are also able to twist the truth into something unrecognisable in an attempt to make yourself look good.

Too bad that neither of you succeeds, mainly due to obviously proclaiming outright falsehoods.

[Sebbe1337o]

Merchant2006 wrote...

I never asked for this.

+1

You, sir, won the internet.

[DiebytheSword]

psiasterisk wrote...

BlueAlchemy wrote...

So... Raider's of the Lost Arc.

Haha, you´re right, I didn´t think about that.

Very good example.

Spoilery information concealed for mental health reasons(I will maintain some decorum while explaining this and not name names or places):

That said, my argument against labeling the ME3 spoiler, which may not even be entirely accurate anymore, required so much effort for Shepard to aquire and move it cannot possibly be a DEM.  It requires nearly the entire game to collect, it requires getting through the Reaper fleet around and on Earth, it requires defensive measures after their lines are broken.  Then it requires a fight through the final locale, which I will not reveal, THEN it requires that it be hooked up and activated despite Shepard's condition when he/she arrives.  THEN its a conversation and choice at the end, this is not a DEM.  DEM's are out of the protagonists hands, they break the logic of the story and cause considerable doubt as to how lucky one individual has to be.  This device does not swoop in and save the day by making choices on its own, out of the protagonists hands; it makes the change only at the behest of the protagonists, thus it cannot be a DEM.

It serves as a MacGuffin, perhaps a BDO, but never a Deus Ex Machina.

[Justicar]

I'd like to see a Chekov's Gun with the Leviathan of Dis or similar.

It might be simple war, which can be amazing as well. There are six endings in the story leak within the beta, according to the (old) leak, which is great compared to ME2's only real endings. ME2 had two endings, squaddies don't count.

A deus ex machina wouldn't bother me /too/ much. Do BioWare have a good history of not having them?

[psiasterisk]

Justicar wrote...

A deus ex machina wouldn't bother me /too/ much. Do BioWare have a good history of not having them?

Well, as far as I remember, there was one in Jade Empire, but it was handled pretty well.

[BlueAlchemy]

^ This. Bioware is usually very good at handling this sort of thing. That's why people became ragers after EA bought them out. Because they thought EA would corrupt them with their evil ways.

[DiebytheSword]

Justicar wrote...

I'd like to see a Chekov's Gun with the Leviathan of Dis or similar.

It might be simple war, which can be amazing as well. There are six endings in the story leak within the beta, according to the (old) leak, which is great compared to ME2's only real endings. ME2 had two endings, squaddies don't count.

A deus ex machina wouldn't bother me /too/ much. Do BioWare have a good history of not having them?

I expect one or more Checkov's Guns to materialize, as ME has a very rich background to write with.  The Leviathan of Dis, the Mass Effect weapon that scored Klendagon, even Project Lazarus can all suddenly reappear to change the story at a dramatic moment.

I haven't seen Bioware do a proper DEM at all, that would require something like the Stand where the hand of god literally kills every one of the book's villains by detonating a nuke in Las Vegas.

[onelifecrisis]

DiebytheSword wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

The key to a DEM being a DEM is abruptness and sudden, break neck change in fortune for the protagonist.

We are two thirds of the way through the story already. Anything indtroduced now is abrupt/sudden.

Apparently your opinion of abrupt and sudden trancends mine as fact.

We are two thirds of the way through the series, not the story of Mass Effect 3.  Anything introduced to defeat the reapers by your definition would then be a DEM.    By your definition even getting the races to work together to help at Earth at the behest of Shepard would be Deus Ex Machina.  I am starting to think that people arguing the DEM angle were never going to be happy with whatever solution was presented to the reaper threat.

Under what scenario would you not consider a way to defeat the reapers a DEM?  How would you resolve the plot?
 
Kindly tell me how this affects the other points, like breaking the internal story logic, or perhaps how the object in question swoops in and saves the day in an incredible reversal of fortune that stretches suspension of disbelief?

I've been saying for a while that ME3 will have to have a DEM (at least by "my definition" as you put it) because nothing was done in ME2 to help with the reaper threat, or even foreshadow something that could help. I've accepted that ME3 will not resolve the reaper threat in a way that I find satisfactory. I've said before that I'd rather have a DEM that provides closure than no DEM and an unfinished story. A story with a DEM is IMO not ideal, but it's not necessarily a disaster either. I can still potentially enjoy it, especially with my expectations properly set by the knowledge that there has to be a DEM in ME3. But I'm not going to start agreeing that there's no DEM, when there clearly is. It might not be THE WORST DEM EVAR, but it's still a DEM. BW have spent 60 hours telling me the reapers cannot be defeated by anyone ever using any means. That's their fault, not mine.

[psiasterisk]

DiebytheSword wrote...



I expect one or more Checkov's Guns to materialize, as ME has a very rich background to write with.  The Leviathan of Dis, the Mass Effect weapon that scored Klendagon, even Project Lazarus can all suddenly reappear to change the story at a dramatic moment.

The Klendagon Weapon... That, of course, would be a BDO, a potential MacGuffin and a Chekhov´s Gun (or Cannon) all rolled into one.

[DiebytheSword]

onelifecrisis wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

The key to a DEM being a DEM is abruptness and sudden, break neck change in fortune for the protagonist.

We are two thirds of the way through the story already. Anything indtroduced now is abrupt/sudden.

Apparently your opinion of abrupt and sudden trancends mine as fact.

We are two thirds of the way through the series, not the story of Mass Effect 3.  Anything introduced to defeat the reapers by your definition would then be a DEM.    By your definition even getting the races to work together to help at Earth at the behest of Shepard would be Deus Ex Machina.  I am starting to think that people arguing the DEM angle were never going to be happy with whatever solution was presented to the reaper threat.

Under what scenario would you not consider a way to defeat the reapers a DEM?  How would you resolve the plot?
 
Kindly tell me how this affects the other points, like breaking the internal story logic, or perhaps how the object in question swoops in and saves the day in an incredible reversal of fortune that stretches suspension of disbelief?

I've been saying for a while that ME3 will have to have a DEM (at least by "my definition" as you put it) because nothing was done in ME2 to help with the reaper threat, or even foreshadow something that could help. I've accepted that ME3 will not resolve the reaper threat in a way that I find satisfactory. I've said before that I'd rather have a DEM that provides closure than no DEM and an unfinished story. A story with a DEM is IMO not ideal, but it's not necessarily a disaster either. I can still potentially enjoy it, especially with my expectations properly set by the knowledge that there has to be a DEM in ME3. But I'm not going to start agreeing that there's no DEM, when there clearly is. It might not be THE WORST DEM EVAR, but it's still a DEM. BW have spent 60 hours telling me the reapers cannot be defeated by anyone ever using any means. That's their fault, not mine.

We disagree on the definition of DEM then, and with neither opinion being more correct than any other, this will continue to be unresolved.  You say there is clearly a DEM, I say that by definition the end plot device is not.  We are at an impasse unless you find a better definition for DEM than I have, or if you knew Horace personally.  You talked about not wanting to speak of definitions in another thread, yet you argue the definition of something here.  I don't want to debate the meaning of DEM, I have a factual account of what a DEM is and knowledge that the plot device in the leak does not fit that description.

I disagree with both your definition, because it is not the commonly accepted one, and your assertion that nothing was done concerning the reaper threat.  The very idea that the reaper threat is a known one already breaks the cycle of extinction as the Reapers need it to happen, and because of that the Protheans have succeeded, just not in their cycle.  Vigil has pointed out that the Reapers are not as invincible as you claim BW has told you they are.  Powerful yes, invincible no.  Further, this alone pre-empts the need to write a DEM, again, which I say does not exist, despite people desperately trying to redifine the literary tool.

In short, your misunderstanding of the literary device and what they have written into the plot of the first game is your fault, not theirs.

I will agree that little in ME2 was done concerning the reapers, except that their attempt to start the cycle of extinction against the humans in secret obviously failed.  Plan C time.

@Psiasterisk, that's a great assessment of the situation should that plot device be cashed in.

Modifié par DiebytheSword, 16 novembre 2011 - 12:14 .

[Psearo]

BlueAlchemy wrote...

psiasterisk wrote...

You´re correct about that, especially the part that DEMs are intrinsically different from MacGuffins. You could maybe construct a MacGuffin that´s also a DEM, but it would be a stretch.
Let´s say, for example, we had a story where the protagonists and the antagonists both try to acquire some sort bomb with the antagonists succeeding only to find out, while planting it to blow up some other kind of plot device, that the bomb had actually been alive and intelligent all along and sympathizing with the protagonists cause, therefore refusing to explode.

So... Raider's of the Lost Arc.

Honestly, as I was reading psiasterisk's post there, I was reminded of a low-budget film called Dark Star, a sort of fore runner to Alien from the same writers.
The ship Dark Star went around blowing up lifeless planets with intelligent bombs, and one of them decides to initiate its destruct sequence. After reasoning with the bomb by convincing it that it didn't exist, it aborted its destruct sequence. It later exploded because it reasoned that if it didn't exist, detonation wouldn't do anything...
The films was so low budget that the only alien creature aboard the ship was blatantly a beach ball with feet, ears etc stuck on it.

One question I'd ask in regards to potential DEM/CC etc, is whether or not previous civilisations had destroyed a Reaper and reverse engineered its technology before e.g. the Thanix cannon.
Pretty sure there were other things recovered from Sovereign that have been/are being worked on, by Council races and others, so that could be a potential plot device regarding defense against the Reapers. Some being in different stages of development etc.

[BlueAlchemy]

Can anyone clearly define MacGruber's Gun?

[DiebytheSword]

Psearo wrote...

BlueAlchemy wrote...

psiasterisk wrote...

You´re correct about that, especially the part that DEMs are intrinsically different from MacGuffins. You could maybe construct a MacGuffin that´s also a DEM, but it would be a stretch.
Let´s say, for example, we had a story where the protagonists and the antagonists both try to acquire some sort bomb with the antagonists succeeding only to find out, while planting it to blow up some other kind of plot device, that the bomb had actually been alive and intelligent all along and sympathizing with the protagonists cause, therefore refusing to explode.

So... Raider's of the Lost Arc.

Honestly, as I was reading psiasterisk's post there, I was reminded of a low-budget film called Dark Star, a sort of fore runner to Alien from the same writers.
The ship Dark Star went around blowing up lifeless planets with intelligent bombs, and one of them decides to initiate its destruct sequence. After reasoning with the bomb by convincing it that it didn't exist, it aborted its destruct sequence. It later exploded because it reasoned that if it didn't exist, detonation wouldn't do anything...
The films was so low budget that the only alien creature aboard the ship was blatantly a beach ball with feet, ears etc stuck on it.

One question I'd ask in regards to potential DEM/CC etc, is whether or not previous civilisations had destroyed a Reaper and reverse engineered its technology before e.g. the Thanix cannon.
Pretty sure there were other things recovered from Sovereign that have been/are being worked on, by Council races and others, so that could be a potential plot device regarding defense against the Reapers. Some being in different stages of development etc.

I'm positive that individual reapers have been defeated, like the one at Mnemosyne, more than once in the past.  But it seems that the resultant win could never be enough because the counter attack isn't enough to undo the damage from the Citadel trap.  The Protheans died out over centuries, it is not unreasonable that they have developed something to fight the reapers with that might be found.

@ BlueAlchemy:  No.

Modifié par DiebytheSword, 16 novembre 2011 - 12:22 .

[onelifecrisis]

DiebytheSword wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

The key to a DEM being a DEM is abruptness and sudden, break neck change in fortune for the protagonist.

We are two thirds of the way through the story already. Anything indtroduced now is abrupt/sudden.

Apparently your opinion of abrupt and sudden trancends mine as fact.

We are two thirds of the way through the series, not the story of Mass Effect 3.  Anything introduced to defeat the reapers by your definition would then be a DEM.    By your definition even getting the races to work together to help at Earth at the behest of Shepard would be Deus Ex Machina.  I am starting to think that people arguing the DEM angle were never going to be happy with whatever solution was presented to the reaper threat.

Under what scenario would you not consider a way to defeat the reapers a DEM?  How would you resolve the plot?
 
Kindly tell me how this affects the other points, like breaking the internal story logic, or perhaps how the object in question swoops in and saves the day in an incredible reversal of fortune that stretches suspension of disbelief?

I've been saying for a while that ME3 will have to have a DEM (at least by "my definition" as you put it) because nothing was done in ME2 to help with the reaper threat, or even foreshadow something that could help. I've accepted that ME3 will not resolve the reaper threat in a way that I find satisfactory. I've said before that I'd rather have a DEM that provides closure than no DEM and an unfinished story. A story with a DEM is IMO not ideal, but it's not necessarily a disaster either. I can still potentially enjoy it, especially with my expectations properly set by the knowledge that there has to be a DEM in ME3. But I'm not going to start agreeing that there's no DEM, when there clearly is. It might not be THE WORST DEM EVAR, but it's still a DEM. BW have spent 60 hours telling me the reapers cannot be defeated by anyone ever using any means. That's their fault, not mine.

We disagree on the definition of DEM then, and with neither opinion being more correct than any other, this will continue to be unresolved.  You say there is clearly a DEM, I say that by definition the end plot device is not.  We are at an impasse unless you find a better definition for DEM than I have, or if you knew Horace personally.  You talked about not wanting to speak of definitions in another thread, yet you argue the definition of something here.  I don't want to debate the meaning of DEM, I have a factual account of what a DEM is and knowledge that the plot device in the leak does not fit that description.

I disagree with both your definition, because it is not the commonly accepted one, and your assertion that nothing was done concerning the reaper threat.  The very idea that the reaper threat is a known one already breaks the cycle of extinction as the Reapers need it to happen, and because of that the Protheans have succeeded, just not in their cycle.  Vigil has pointed out that the Reapers are not as invincible as you claim BW has told you they are.  Powerful yes, invincible no.  Further, this alone pre-empts the need to write a DEM, again, which I say does not exist, despite people desperately trying to redifine the literary tool.

In short, your misunderstanding of the literary device and what they have written into the plot of the first game is your fault, not theirs.

I will agree that little in ME2 was done concerning the reapers, except that their attempt to start the cycle of extinction against the humans in secret obviously failed.  Plan C time.

@Psiasterisk, that's a great assessment of the situation should that plot device be cashed in.

Well, at least you started out by saying neither opinion is more valid. A shame you then caved to the temptation to state that yours is right and mine is wrong, make an appeal to authority, then tell me I'm dumb and that BW's sucky storytelling is my own fault. Nice try though.

[robarcool]

Kaiser Shepard wrote...

robarcool wrote...

No deus Ex Machinas and no unimaginative solution like the one in Gears 3 (if that is classified as something other than deus ex machina).

It's about as contrived as that one, although arguably worse because of the series having started rather ambitiously when it came to the story and choice/consequence aspects.

I am at a loss here. What are you referring to as "it is as contrived as that one"? Do you mean the GOW ending or are you talking about ME3 ending (something that you know and is not common knowledge)?

Modifié par robarcool, 16 novembre 2011 - 12:29 .

[BlueAlchemy]

DiebytheSword wrote...



@ BlueAlchemy:  No.

Only curious! I must say that your theories are quite thought provoking though. And have you read the leaks?

[Abirn]

I disagree, Simply beating the reapers conventionally will ruin the entire trilogy. For the first 2 games reapers were built up to have powers that would be seen as godlike. In the first game it took an entire army of various species just to take one out. Now there are hundreds or thousands coming. Being able to simply beat them in a military battle would ruin the first 2 games.

[psiasterisk]

Psearo wrote...

Honestly, as I was reading psiasterisk's post there, I was reminded of a low-budget film called Dark Star, a sort of fore runner to Alien from the same writers.

To be honest, when I wrote that post, Dark Star came to my mind as well. I find it a pretty good movie, actually. You could discuss it for hours like you should be able to with every good film. Another interpretation of the epistemology debate with the bomb at the end, for example, would be that the bomb deduced that it was the only thing to exist at all and therefore resolved to do the only thing it knew it could, which was to explode. But anyways: The bomb in this case was neither a MacGuffin nor a DEM.

I also thought of a really bad movie from the early ´90s called "Warhammer", which would fit the description pretty well (other than "Raiders", of course).

Modifié par psiasterisk, 16 novembre 2011 - 12:36 .

[DiebytheSword]

onelifecrisis wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

onelifecrisis wrote...

DiebytheSword wrote...

The key to a DEM being a DEM is abruptness and sudden, break neck change in fortune for the protagonist.

We are two thirds of the way through the story already. Anything indtroduced now is abrupt/sudden.

Apparently your opinion of abrupt and sudden trancends mine as fact.

We are two thirds of the way through the series, not the story of Mass Effect 3.  Anything introduced to defeat the reapers by your definition would then be a DEM.    By your definition even getting the races to work together to help at Earth at the behest of Shepard would be Deus Ex Machina.  I am starting to think that people arguing the DEM angle were never going to be happy with whatever solution was presented to the reaper threat.

Under what scenario would you not consider a way to defeat the reapers a DEM?  How would you resolve the plot?
 
Kindly tell me how this affects the other points, like breaking the internal story logic, or perhaps how the object in question swoops in and saves the day in an incredible reversal of fortune that stretches suspension of disbelief?

I've been saying for a while that ME3 will have to have a DEM (at least by "my definition" as you put it) because nothing was done in ME2 to help with the reaper threat, or even foreshadow something that could help. I've accepted that ME3 will not resolve the reaper threat in a way that I find satisfactory. I've said before that I'd rather have a DEM that provides closure than no DEM and an unfinished story. A story with a DEM is IMO not ideal, but it's not necessarily a disaster either. I can still potentially enjoy it, especially with my expectations properly set by the knowledge that there has to be a DEM in ME3. But I'm not going to start agreeing that there's no DEM, when there clearly is. It might not be THE WORST DEM EVAR, but it's still a DEM. BW have spent 60 hours telling me the reapers cannot be defeated by anyone ever using any means. That's their fault, not mine.

We disagree on the definition of DEM then, and with neither opinion being more correct than any other, this will continue to be unresolved.  You say there is clearly a DEM, I say that by definition the end plot device is not.  We are at an impasse unless you find a better definition for DEM than I have, or if you knew Horace personally.  You talked about not wanting to speak of definitions in another thread, yet you argue the definition of something here.  I don't want to debate the meaning of DEM, I have a factual account of what a DEM is and knowledge that the plot device in the leak does not fit that description.

I disagree with both your definition, because it is not the commonly accepted one, and your assertion that nothing was done concerning the reaper threat.  The very idea that the reaper threat is a known one already breaks the cycle of extinction as the Reapers need it to happen, and because of that the Protheans have succeeded, just not in their cycle.  Vigil has pointed out that the Reapers are not as invincible as you claim BW has told you they are.  Powerful yes, invincible no.  Further, this alone pre-empts the need to write a DEM, again, which I say does not exist, despite people desperately trying to redifine the literary tool.

In short, your misunderstanding of the literary device and what they have written into the plot of the first game is your fault, not theirs.

I will agree that little in ME2 was done concerning the reapers, except that their attempt to start the cycle of extinction against the humans in secret obviously failed.  Plan C time.

@Psiasterisk, that's a great assessment of the situation should that plot device be cashed in.

Well, at least you started out by saying neither opinion is more valid. A shame you then caved to the temptation to state that yours is right and mine is wrong, make an appeal to authority, then tell me I'm dumb and that BW's sucky storytelling is my own fault. Nice try though.

A definition is fact.  Your personal take on a literary device is opinion.  Try again.  Or better, don't.  If I have an opinion, it is that a defintion was given that you don't agree with.  So what temptation did I cave to?  I have presented facts, you have presented your smart mouth and nothing more.

Further, I never alluded to your intellegence level, that is your problem.  I could care less.  I stated that your understanding of a literary device is flawed.  Further you conveniently forget plot items that don't support your argument, or you simply did not remember it, which is it?

It doesn't matter, because it still does nothing to change the fact that I never called you dumb.

Unless you come at me with some facts to support your accusations I'm considering this conversation pointless to continue.