320 réponses à ce sujet

[AdmiralCheez]

Saphra Deden wrote...

That is not calling him out on his bull****. I want to challenge his assertion that the geth did nothing wrong in the Morning War, I want to challenge his stance that the quarians should apologize for anything.

So you want to make a speech about it.  Me, I wanted Shepard to say something not stupid on Horizon.  Unfortunately, stuff gets cut or compressed, and occasionally the writers have an off day and come up with some real gems like Benezia's last words.

Though that may have been bad acting.  Hard to tell with that woman.  Oh, Boobnezia, you silly goose.

I never said there were no likable quarians in Mass Effect. I said that when it comes to the geth they are always the badguys. At least outside of Tali's recruitment mission maybe.

But Tali's recruitment mission was pretty damn brutal.  And certainly Jona's mom was TOTALLY the bad guy.

If you did not choke up at that part, you have no soul.

I agree that the plight of the quarians is deep and complex. Why are you trying to tell me this? I know it. Better than you, I'll bet.

I'm telling you this because you said something that was completely untrue, and here again you fail to admit you are at fault.

That wasn't the point of that discussion. It was that Bioware is loathe to really show it or address. Yes, there is a good scene with Tali (that is easy to miss, by the way) about what she misses out on in a suit. However we never get to challenge geth over this. Hell, sometimes Legion is right there but I don't get a word out of him.

You also don't get to challenge Miranda's stupid outfit, or Kasumi's kleptomania, or TIM about what his group was responsible for on Akuze.  Bioware accidentally a lot of things.  But Legion was a vehicle through which the player was supposed to learn about the geth.  He was primarily a source of information, like Tali in ME1.  That's kind of how most squadmates are--they tell you about themselves and where they came from.  It's kind of rare to be able to pick a fight with your mates at all.  Most of the time, if there's a disagreement, you just force your will upon them with magical colored text.  And what would telling Legion what the geth did was wrong do, anyway?  He'd just tell you that they had no choice because the quarians were trying to kill them.  He'd also remind you that the true geth are open to peace with the quarians if ever given the opportunity, and have been stewards of the homeworld in the meantime.

Want to know something hilarious? My mother tends to get banned from forums too. I guess it runs in the family.

I get banned from forums, too.  Luke, I am your mother.

I never knew you talked about. I was able to guess just based on the way you carry yourself here. Somedays you almost seem apologetic or as if you want to make friends with me, and then other days you are as vicious as I am. Well, almost maybe. You try.

I'm not as viscous as you are and I don't try to be.  I actually want to like you and get along with you.

Okay hold up my roomie is drunk off her ass and needs help getting to bed.  I'll pick this up later.  I'll probably realize in the morning how petty and futile this is, but I AM A PERSISTENT BEAST.

[MrFob]

vonSlash wrote...
I agree that I'd like to see more variance
in decision impact in ME3, and I think that we might actually get that,
at least to an extent, since ME3 can't be imported into anything else.
However, when you consider the potential fate of your squadmates in
ME2's suicide mission, as well as noting how that (and that alone)
really limited what roles they could play in ME3, I'd hesitate before
claiming that "everything in ME2 was rather tied-together" as far as
decision consequence is concerned.

Oh, well I meant they kept the consequences of the decisions you had ME1 rather small in ME2.
As far as the squad mates are concerned, I agree, too many variables to go really big on the concequences but I actually hope they rather take the big issues and introduce variety there. I have no problem with them replacing a dead suqaddie with another character from time to time since that is exactly what happens in RL often, if someone can't do the job for whatever reason, a replacement will step in. As long as they make some dialogue that fits the character (and prevent another virmire-survivor disaster), I am fine with that. Better to keep focused on bigger things like the council decision, the collector base or he rachni situation.

Modifié par MrFob, 27 janvier 2012 - 06:29 .

[Lotion Soronarr]

Does anyone really expect Bio/EA to come out and say "we didn't really plan this ahead".
True or not, they'd never admit to that.

[Tazzmission]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Does anyone really expect Bio/EA to come out and say "we didn't really plan this ahead".
True or not, they'd never admit to that.

wether they do or not complaining is always going to happen.


i just hope that people quit it after the game is out because i have a feeling itll continue

[Lotion Soronarr]

EternalAmbiguity wrote...

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Does anyone really expect Bio/EA to come out and say "we didn't really plan this ahead".
True or not, they'd never admit to that.

*cough*

Isn't that exactly what they said?

Just saying that it's pointless to bring up what any Bio/EA employee said about the plot - there are some things they cannot say and hope to keep their job.

Wether the entire trilogy was pre-planned in advance or were ME2 and 3 quickly put togetehr (more likely) is not something you can deduce from dev commentary.

[Reptilian Rob]

vonSlash wrote...

Reptilian Rob wrote...

MFW nobody in this thread realizes what EA and Bioware are actually doing with the Mass Effect 3 DLC marketing.

Plebeians.

As far as I understood it, we were talking about the inconsistencies between ME1, ME2, and ME3 due to Bioware not planning ahead, not how EA execs get aroused by the thought of more ME3 pre-orders.

ME3 DLC isn't really a big issue in this thead, afaik.

Both notions support the fack that EA and Bioware have no clue in Jupiter's **** what they're doing.

So yeah, relevancy.

[moneycashgeorge]

LOL at all the people saying "thats how it's done" and using, of all people, the hack George Lucas as proof.

Good stories, designed to be released in installments, are of course significantly outlined before the first installment is released. You think Tolkien had no idea what was going to happen when he dropped Fellowship? Or that Martin hadn't planned the general path of the characters when he released Game of Thrones?

Small changes, deviations, expansions sure. Authors adapt to new ideas as they continue to write more in-depth. But what Casey is saying here is ridiculous.

I remember the ME1 marketing. They explicitly stated that Mass Effect was a cohesive trilogy and that you would be able to alter the course of the story.

They lied. Simple as that.

The ME plot is all over the place IMO. ME1's story is a perfect first chapter, but ME2 really screwed it up and ME3 is suffering as a result.

[StephanieBengal]

moneycashgeorge wrote...

LOL at all the people saying "thats how it's done" and using, of all people, the hack George Lucas as proof.

Good stories, designed to be released in installments, are of course significantly outlined before the first installment is released. You think Tolkien had no idea what was going to happen when he dropped Fellowship? Or that Martin hadn't planned the general path of the characters when he released Game of Thrones?

Small changes, deviations, expansions sure. Authors adapt to new ideas as they continue to write more in-depth. But what Casey is saying here is ridiculous.

I remember the ME1 marketing. They explicitly stated that Mass Effect was a cohesive trilogy and that you would be able to alter the course of the story.

They lied. Simple as that.

The ME plot is all over the place IMO. ME1's story is a perfect first chapter, but ME2 really screwed it up and ME3 is suffering as a result.

What did ME2 screw up in your IMO? I'm not saying that I disagreeing, just wanting some specfics. 

[Capeo]

StephanieBengal wrote...

moneycashgeorge wrote...

LOL at all the people saying "thats how it's done" and using, of all people, the hack George Lucas as proof.

Good stories, designed to be released in installments, are of course significantly outlined before the first installment is released. You think Tolkien had no idea what was going to happen when he dropped Fellowship? Or that Martin hadn't planned the general path of the characters when he released Game of Thrones?

Small changes, deviations, expansions sure. Authors adapt to new ideas as they continue to write more in-depth. But what Casey is saying here is ridiculous.

I remember the ME1 marketing. They explicitly stated that Mass Effect was a cohesive trilogy and that you would be able to alter the course of the story.

They lied. Simple as that.

The ME plot is all over the place IMO. ME1's story is a perfect first chapter, but ME2 really screwed it up and ME3 is suffering as a result.

What did ME2 screw up in your IMO? I'm not saying that I disagreeing, just wanting some specfics. 

Though you didn't ask me personally I'll give you my perspective on that.  ME2 was essentially filler.  It was an entire game that didn't setup anything coming in ME3 (I've read the script but won't go into details).  They wasted an entire game on collecting characters that nothing in ME3 hinges on.  Not having some will make things more difficult but it doesn't change the overall plot as they are replaced by a stand in if it's integral to the plot.  

So we have a whole game spent collecting what amounts to mission givers that could instead have had more relevance to the overall trilogy and foreshadowed what was coming.  What does come is entirely WTF in a lot of regards and would be a lot easier to swallow if you at least uncovered some hints of it in ME2.  Instead we have a suicide mission and a human Reaper reveal and that's really the only new information we get.  This forces ME3 to just pile on the reveals like crazy.

To me a more sensible progression would have been to introduce the threat in 1 as it did.  In 2 develop the threat.  Still find out how the Reapers come about but earlier in the game and spend the second half seeking a way to stop them, even finding out to certain degree but have the Reapers arrive at the end of the game as the climax.  In the third it's a race to the answer while trying to avoid the invasion as the Reapers would know what you are trying to do.

As it is now 3 just piles on reveals, many completely unforeseen, to the point of some head scratching.  I think the issue was, as much as they say they wanted a trilogy, they weren't committed enough to make games that couldn't stand completely on their own.  After reading the script for 3 I also simply can't believe they even knew how they were going to end it while writing 2.    

[Descy_]

Capeo wrote...



Though you didn't ask me personally I'll give you my perspective on that.  ME2 was essentially filler.  It was an entire game that didn't setup anything coming in ME3 (I've read the script but won't go into details).

Arrival.

BAM!

[Capeo]

Descy_ wrote...

Capeo wrote...



Though you didn't ask me personally I'll give you my perspective on that.  ME2 was essentially filler.  It was an entire game that didn't setup anything coming in ME3 (I've read the script but won't go into details).

Arrival.

BAM!

LOL!  Huh?

[Medhia Nox]

@Godwood: from several pages back - you claim that my request for "a body of work" proving someone can do what they seem to claim they are an authority on is "fanboy defense"

It's interesting - since I wasn't defending the ME story - which I stated earlier that there are several things (including the main story itself - the Reapers) that I do not like.

Saying you dislike, hate, or think something is bad... is one thing. Saying the writers have no skill is quite another.

For the later - I require proof that you have a goddamn clue what you even THINK you're talking about. Which I believe Saphra and Lotion certainly do not.

Any imbecile can dislike a story - so can any laureate - that is opinion, we all have one, they all stink - but I don't listen to the authority of those who have not proven themselves capable of doing exactly what they're saying another cannot do to their standards.

[ciaweth]

Someday when the OP is desperately trying to write something, we should all stand over his/her shoulder and go "OMG YOU ARE MAKING IT UP AS YOU GO ALONG."

[Nizzemancer]

Lotion Soronnar wrote...

Nizzemancer wrote...

What's wrong with that? When I wrote Fanfiction I did my best work by making it up as I went along then refining it to remove plotholes and such. I only had the start and the goal figured out from the start.

As long as your start and goal were more than "hero is an orphan from this town" and "heroe defeats big bad"...

What's wrong with that? Sure it's simplistic but it's a start and a finish, then you flesh it out.

[Il Divo]

moneycashgeorge wrote...

LOL at all the people saying "thats how it's done" and using, of all people, the hack George Lucas as proof.

Good stories, designed to be released in installments, are of course significantly outlined before the first installment is released. You think Tolkien had no idea what was going to happen when he dropped Fellowship? Or that Martin hadn't planned the general path of the characters when he released Game of Thrones?

Small changes, deviations, expansions sure. Authors adapt to new ideas as they continue to write more in-depth. But what Casey is saying here is ridiculous.

I remember the ME1 marketing. They explicitly stated that Mass Effect was a cohesive trilogy and that you would be able to alter the course of the story.

They lied. Simple as that.

The ME plot is all over the place IMO. ME1's story is a perfect first chapter, but ME2 really screwed it up and ME3 is suffering as a result.

I recommend you watch the Star Wars original trilogy. Hint: Despite not planning ahead, there is a reason why it's regarded as the quintessential example of the Hero's Journey in the film medium.

[Capeo]

Il Divo wrote...

moneycashgeorge wrote...

LOL at all the people saying "thats how it's done" and using, of all people, the hack George Lucas as proof.

Good stories, designed to be released in installments, are of course significantly outlined before the first installment is released. You think Tolkien had no idea what was going to happen when he dropped Fellowship? Or that Martin hadn't planned the general path of the characters when he released Game of Thrones?

Small changes, deviations, expansions sure. Authors adapt to new ideas as they continue to write more in-depth. But what Casey is saying here is ridiculous.

I remember the ME1 marketing. They explicitly stated that Mass Effect was a cohesive trilogy and that you would be able to alter the course of the story.

They lied. Simple as that.

The ME plot is all over the place IMO. ME1's story is a perfect first chapter, but ME2 really screwed it up and ME3 is suffering as a result.

I recommend you watch the Star Wars original trilogy. Hint: Despite not planning ahead, there is a reason why it's regarded as the quintessential example of the Hero's Journey in the film medium.

Uh, the Star Wars trilogy is not regarded as quintessential anything in film.  Aside from maybe the quintessential ripoff of Kurasawa's actually quintessential work.  I own my own independent film studio, have taken film studies at three different colleges including the New School (where I've had workshops with Al Pacino, Dustin Hoffman, Ellen Barkin and Philip Seymour Hoffman) and have never seen Star Wars dealt with anything but derision from a creative standpoint.  It and Jaws were essentially the start of the shallow summer tentpole movie that all studios have switched to.  At least Jaws had good acting and direction.

[Il Divo]

Capeo wrote...

Uh, the Star Wars trilogy is not regarded as quintessential anything in film.  Aside from maybe the quintessential ripoff of Kurasawa's actually quintessential work.  I own my own independent film studio, have taken film studies at three different colleges including the New School (where I've had workshops with Al Pacino, Dustin Hoffman, Ellen Barkin and Philip Seymour Hoffman) and have never seen Star Wars dealt with anything but derision from a creative standpoint.  It and Jaws were essentially the start of the shallow summer tentpole movie that all studios have switched to.  At least Jaws had good acting and direction.

And that's wonderful for your own independent studio. It sounds more like you simply hate Star Wars. Hint: it's the monomyth.

Modifié par Il Divo, 27 janvier 2012 - 05:29 .

[Darth Death]

implodinggoat wrote...

slimgrin wrote...

Of course they've been making it up as they go. The evidence in ME2 is abundant. The real issue is whether they're good at making the story up as they go.

I'd say they had some really good ideas in ME2; but their execution of those ideas was lacking.

Take the Illusive Man for example.   He's a really great villain; but there are a lot of better ways that they could have introduced him then by having Shepard play the part of his puppet for the entirity of ME2.

Having him be an unlikely ally who both aids and manipulates you on occassion fit the character well; but having him be the one who chooses the missions and orders Shepard where to go made Shepard feel like a powerless wimp in his/her own game.

The Collector's are an even better example.   The concept of the Protheans being repurposed into soulless pawns by the Reapers is a good idea that would have been a wonderful and dramatic means of revealing more about the past conflict between the Reapers and the Protheans.

But there's no lead in to the revelation that the Collector's were Prothean, you're just suddenly told what they are on the Collector Cruiser and then play the rest of the game without the plot line being expanded on.   The Collectors could have acted as a great means for really exploring what the Reapers are, how they operate, and what they did to the Protheans and those that came before the Protheans; but instead they're just a dangling plot line.

This is true. Creating good concepts are easy, but connecting them to each other seamlessly is difficult. That's the challenge (well, for me anyway) when making a story. Planning everything in advance is hard and time consuming, but it all pays off in the end. Just like anyone who works hard & smart in general, it always pays off. And anyone who views it will see it in your work. 

I'm no professional, but I do like (& use) the 'planning everything out' method. I just see more advantages doing stories this way. Of course, there isn't a correct method to writing a good story. Whatever that's comfortable for the writer is what counts.  

Modifié par Darth Death, 27 janvier 2012 - 05:38 .

[Thoth_Amon]

ciaweth wrote...

Someday when the OP is desperately trying to write something, we should all stand over his/her shoulder and go "OMG YOU ARE MAKING IT UP AS YOU GO ALONG."

Right up there with "X band sucks? Oh yeah?  I don't see you making any music!" or "I'd like to see you direct a film!" in terms of sheer stupidity.

[AlanC9]

AdmiralCheez wrote...
  But Legion was a vehicle through which the player was supposed to learn about the geth.  He was primarily a source of information, like Tali in ME1.  That's kind of how most squadmates are--they tell you about themselves and where they came from.

That was a problem for me in ME1. Many of the things you talk to Tali about are things that a reasonably well-informed Shepard would already know. Particularly annoying after the first playthrough, where I've got no RP reason to ask the questions and I already know the answers myself.

Come to think of it, a lot of the ME1 dialogues are kind of clunky, but I usually give Bio a pass since it was a new conversation system.

[AlanC9]

moneycashgeorge wrote...
I remember the ME1 marketing. They explicitly stated that Mass Effect was a cohesive trilogy and that you would be able to alter the course of the story.

They lied. Simple as that.

Actually, I think it's more like they thought they could do something that turned out to be unfeasible.

Doesn't really bother me, since I never thought we'd have as much control over the story as some of the more credulous fans did.

[Il Divo]

AlanC9 wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...
  But Legion was a vehicle through which the player was supposed to learn about the geth.  He was primarily a source of information, like Tali in ME1.  That's kind of how most squadmates are--they tell you about themselves and where they came from.

That was a problem for me in ME1. Many of the things you talk to Tali about are things that a reasonably well-informed Shepard would already know. Particularly annoying after the first playthrough, where I've got no RP reason to ask the questions and I already know the answers myself.

Come to think of it, a lot of the ME1 dialogues are kind of clunky, but I usually give Bio a pass since it was a new conversation system.

Depending on the character, I do agree. Tali (and to a lesser extent Liara) felt largely like info dumps regarding their respective races' history and culture. While nice, alot of that can be limited to codex entries. On the other hand, Wrex was more in the style of Canderous Ordo, where the player was receiving information about that character's backstories, and through that window getting insight into their culture.

Modifié par Il Divo, 27 janvier 2012 - 05:48 .