428 réponses à ce sujet

[GreenDragon37]

KingDan97 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

KingDan97 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

KingDan97 wrote...
...but if she dies because what? I spread myself too thin, that's garbage.

Not really, that's common sense. Spread yourself out to thin or overextend your reach far beyond what you can muster, and that's bound to happen.

But what's stopping me from gathering the resources to cover the same area without it being "too thin". Tell me that? If you can't come up with a satisfying answer it's garbage. It's different than just the shuttles on the end of Earth, those had purpose, they sparked the fire because they killed off the kid you tried to save, the kid you thought had been saved died because that's what the reapers do. I might even come to care about that kid when he doesn't clip through trees while playing but choosing between my squadmates and random people I have no reason to care about aside from being people is  a half-choice. It basically just allows you to kill of those squaddies you don't like(again, Tali haters may pull her through the suicide mission just to have her die for an even stupider reason than a missile to the face.

Again, you are only factoring civilians into the equation. Not key strong-holds or artifacts that can help you win the war. Which many of your squad would probably be happy to die for if it made a dent in the Reapers' plans.

Give me one GOOD reason jack would die for an artifact, or a planet. She doesn't care about her homeworld or the galaxy, she cares about Shepard if they romanced, otherwise she's in it for herself. Grunt just wants to kill, Morinth just wants to have sex, Zaeed is in it for the money and Kasumi only cared about Keiji. None of them have a reason to just up and kill themselves for a planet or an artifact because if they die how will they kill, or hump or spend their money or reminice over Keiji?

How many times can they pull a planet being destroyed? Virmire was well enough written because they weren't walking to their deaths. Let's assume I spread myself too thin though, what stops whatever killed them from just plowing through whatever I was protecting?

You are picking froma  limited character pool.

Who says it has to be Jack? What if it's Garrus, or Tali, or Kaiden/Ashley? If you pick Jack, then she woudn't defend the strong-hold or get the artifact, she'd bug out. Meaning a loss to the Artifact/Strong-hold, but Jack lives. Choices and consequences based on character. Something that should be considered, and would be a wise move to do.

[KingDan97]

GreenDragon37 wrote...

KingDan97 wrote...

GreenDragon37 wrote...

You failed to look at my other options, like choosing between an artifact that can help end the war faster, and your squadmates, or holding onto a key position that you don't want to fall to the Reapers. Nothing making the game unwinable, of course. Just making it a little more difficult to achieve victory and prevent more deaths from happening.

What though, makes those deaths any more worthwhile. What makes those special, aside from the prothy, who wold it make sense to die for a prothean artifact? You aren't giving them any more significance in dying, you're giving me other shallow things that because of a lack of history with said things I have no reason to care about and therefore have no significance for the individual.

Maybe because unlike you, it shows the characters are willing to make sacrifices for the greater good. Not everyone is as selfish as you make them out to be. It'd be perfectly in character for Garrus to throw his life on the line as long as it meant the galaxy would do a lot better. That sure does seem to be something Garrus would do... However, their would probably be an option around this (ME2 SM survivor taking his place, many other variables, etc.).

I'm not saying they wouldn't, I am saying it's stupid to just kill of characters in generic "Oh noes the wurld is doomered!" scenarios instead of actually crafting a scripted death that would actually mean a damned thing for their charater. I don't care that Garrus died for a random base that will be reaper free an hour after the end of the game, I care that Wrex gave his life to protect the last full record or Krogan history, that the best of his people sacrificed themselves for the unity of his people. I'll care that Miranda died putting a bullet in the head of TIM, finally dropping all assumptions about where her loyalties may lie.

That's what I want.

[Harmless Citizen]

I can see Kasumi sacrificing herself. From what I hear of Jack, she could go either way. Morinth wouldn't give a ******, and Zaeed will always live because he's a space cockroach.

[KingDan97]

GreenDragon37 wrote...

You are picking froma  limited character pool.

Who says it has to be Jack? What if it's Garrus, or Tali, or Kaiden/Ashley? If you pick Jack, then she woudn't defend the strong-hold or get the artifact, she'd bug out. Meaning a loss to the Artifact/Strong-hold, but Jack lives. Choices and consequences based on character. Something that should be considered, and would be a wise move to do.

It's not a wise move if they're going in knowing they will DIE, and that their death will not protect a stronghold because leaving behind one person does not protect a BUILDING.

Modifié par KingDan97, 28 novembre 2011 - 05:16 .

[KingDan97]

Random Nobody wrote...

I can see Kasumi sacrificing herself. From what I hear of Jack, she could go either way. Morinth wouldn't give a ******, and Zaeed will always live because he's a space cockroach.

It's not whether it's why and if the why is anything more than being willing to commit SUICIDE for something of no significance to the character. Death for death's sake is pointless in a game, unless it is abosutely pivitol to the survival of everything else, and if it is pivitol why not make it personal?

[AdmiralCheez]

Death is so commonplace and droll. It's like the McDonalds of dramatic elements.

[Harmless Citizen]

Hey, I personally agree with you. If there must be scripted deaths, make them meaningful. If there's a way I can avert them by busting my arse, if I so choose, so be it.

[KingDan97]

Random Nobody wrote...

Hey, I personally agree with you. If there must be scripted deaths, make them meaningful. If there's a way I can avert them by busting my arse, if I so choose, so be it.

I knew you were, I was just saying that will is not reason.

[KingDan97]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Death is so commonplace and droll. It's like the McDonalds of dramatic elements.

I'm not sure if you're being serious but it really is that way, and filling a gap in the story with a death just so character of the day gets to keep his base from the reds doesn't make me think it matters at all, it makes me think the writers want me to think it matters, and those are two entirely different things.

Modifié par KingDan97, 28 novembre 2011 - 05:28 .

[KingDan97]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

KingDan97 wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Death is so commonplace and droll. It's like the McDonalds of dramatic elements.

I'm not sure if you're being serious but it really is that way, and filling a gap in the story with a death just so character of the day gets to keep his base from the reds doesn't make me think it matters at all, it makes me think the writers want me to think it matters, and those are two entirely different things.

She's half serious.


Like I say everytime this topic comes up, the problem with a statement like this is that it's too vague. You can say that about ANYthing.

That's true, and I understand your point, some people didn't care about the kid after watching the leaked demo, while I cared back as far as E3(although to be fair I was in the camp that he was a delusion, still kind of am). All I'm saying though is that whether you cared about the kid or not their was exposition for you at least to root for him, you saw that he was not some super soldier, he was playing with toys, dreaming of joining the alliance some day, then he saw what happened and he realized that the alliance wasn't as infalliable as he believed mere minutes before, but that if he didn't trust them, he might never escape.

They can make me care about one kid, they can't make me care about a random group of civilians I don't spend any time getting to know in any capacity, they can't make me value a friend over a building, especially if that building would go down seconds after they died if they were as integral as we were pretending and they can't make me care that much about a dusty old piece of prothean tech.

I'm not saying that Mordin or Grunt or Garrus or Liara or anyone else couldn't give their lives for something that not only makes sense for the story and the universe, but for them. If I can choose who to leave behind then it's not saying "I care about resolving my past or preventing something I feel responsible for," it's saying "You want me to strap myself to a bomb and run into a reaper core? Okay Shep, but only cause you're so darn charming"

Modifié par KingDan97, 28 novembre 2011 - 05:56 .

[KingDan97]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

How about death being used to convey a sense of powerlessness on behalf of the main character to the player? It makes the villain stronger and if the player empathizes with the main character then it draws them further into the story.

Something like a battle with a villian, but the villian escapes while killing one of the squadies? Does that work?

Yes, this could work because it may not serve the character who dies, but it can serve the purpose of the villain who escapes.(although if we're gonna have something like this I kind of would like a Balak decsicion, but if they die due to a magic bullet at least make out shields get knocked out first, no Jenkins please) However I still feel that if that happens it should be scripted over a dice roll, because at least then reactions from everyone else aren't mad libs.

[Harmless Citizen]

I'd like to say I'm in the camp that didn't give one ****** about the kid.

[matt-bassist]

Just as long as I can get that awesome achievement; 2 For 2 (Kill the Virmire Survivor)

[KingDan97]

Random Nobody wrote...

I'd like to say I'm in the camp that didn't give one ****** about the kid.

But at least they tried, and it was a person not a building.

[Harmless Citizen]

It was a valiant effort.

But really. The only kid in the series, ever? He's gon' die.

[KingDan97]

Random Nobody wrote...

It was a valiant effort.

But really. The only kid in the series, ever? He's gon' die.

A fair point. But can you say it wouldn't have had less punch if it were a building saying you couldn't save it?

Modifié par KingDan97, 28 novembre 2011 - 06:03 .

[AdmiralCheez]

Saphra Deden wrote...

How about death being used to convey a sense of powerlessness on behalf of the main character to the player? It makes the villain stronger and if the player empathizes with the main character then it draws them further into the story.

1. In videogames, especially roleplaying games, you ARE the main character.  You don't need to empathize with the main character because that sh*t's happening to YOU.

Think about it.  When you're playing Super Mario and you miss a jump and plummet off the screen, do you say "Mario died?"  No.  "I died."

This doesn't mean that the protagonist can't have an independent personality (nothing wrong with the Ezios and Nathan Drakes out there), but he/she/it is still the player's avatar, a vessel through which the game is experienced.

Thus, if you're not taking in-game events personally by default, the developers did it wrong.

(And that, kiddies, is the cool thing games can do that movies can't.)

2. You can make the player feel powerless in more ways than just killing off characters.  Take Amnesia, for example--it's scary as hell because you can't fight back against the bad guys; you can only run and hide.  Alternatively, an inevitable failure of any sort will work as well--no matter how many times you replay Mission X, no matter how many different ways you approach it, you cannot obtain Objective Y.  And everything attached to Objective Y (the war assets, the planets, the morale and trust of your crew and friends) will crumble.

[Sajuro]

Saphra Deden wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

How about death being used to convey a sense of powerlessness on behalf of the main character to the player? It makes the villain stronger and if the player empathizes with the main character then it draws them further into the story.

Something like a battle with a villian, but the villian escapes while killing one of the squadies? Does that work?

Sure. There are a lot of ways it could be done.

They're running for cover when one of the squadmates is taken out by an enemy sniper?

[KingDan97]

Sajuro wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Saphra Deden wrote...

How about death being used to convey a sense of powerlessness on behalf of the main character to the player? It makes the villain stronger and if the player empathizes with the main character then it draws them further into the story.

Something like a battle with a villian, but the villian escapes while killing one of the squadies? Does that work?

Sure. There are a lot of ways it could be done.

They're running for cover when one of the squadmates is taken out by an enemy sniper?

Only if they set up the squaddie losing armor, because if snipers can't one shot the player normally on narrative difficulty than it breaks immersion for those players, and snipers normally can only do really significant damage in an NPC's hands when it's on Insanity.

It would also need to come with some interjection(a word that is tragically underused) because paragon or renegade, a no isn't out of Shepard's character no matter how you feel about the character(for example, if Jacob died I personally would yell "THE PRIIIIZZZZEEEE" but Shepard wouldn't because he was a friend and comrade not a badly written character in a video game.

Modifié par KingDan97, 28 novembre 2011 - 06:10 .