2915 réponses à ce sujet

[tmp7704]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

I was trying to illustrate how confusing it would be to have to defend your actions in the Aratoht system if you had never heard words like "Aratoht", "Batarian" and "mass relay" before.  Didn't I nail it?

You have shown that being thrown into situation they have no clue about would be confusing to a new player, provided such player never heard words like "Batarian" or "mass relay" before.

My point was, the trial could be a very good opportunity to familiarize the new player with these very terms and the general situation, as part of easing them in the game setting. And so i had to ask if that's something that simply didn't occur to you, or if you omitted that possibility on purpose.

[Dragoonlordz]

Last paragraph sums up the end result of introduction to me. Disappointment is tip of the iceburg even if also part of my reaction, extreme concern would be more accurate.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 22 février 2012 - 04:37 .

[CaptainZaysh]

tmp7704 wrote...

My point was, the trial could be a very good opportunity to familiarize the new player with these very terms and the general situation, as part of easing them in the game setting. And so i had to ask if that's something that simply didn't occur to you, or if you omitted that possibility on purpose.

It did indeed occur to me.  Ultimately, though, let me ask you this: what purpose would it actually serve to give a new player this kind of in-depth history lesson?  Is it really important at that stage in the script that they understand what a batarian is?  Or is that kind of exposition better served up later in the story, right before Shepard has to interact with some actual batarians?

[Paula Deen]

Farbautisonn wrote...

phimseto wrote...

 Anderson went back into the Alliance. 

-Wat? Ive been a rather regular poster and lurker here and I didnt get that. I even played Arrival.

Moar evidence to the fact that anyone who hasnt played the DLC's and hung around the Fora intensively havent got a bastard clue.

Yeah, pretty much. There is a HUGE gap between ME2 and ME3, even if you did all of the DLC. If you didn't play the DLC, you likely don't have a freaking clue why you're on lockdown, why Anderson is calling you out for "the **** you've done" as court-martial and jail worthy (because saving humanity's hide, AGAIN, without committing any crimes (especially if you're a Spectre) is somehow illegal?), or why Anderson isn't on the Council (seriously, it's only mentioned at all in obscure, brief references in third party works), or where the hell your ME2 crew is.

There's so little exposition (and much of what there is is meaningless, cringe-worthy lines from people who are supposed to be top-ranking Alliance admirals) before the Reapers literally drop down right in front of you. The only meaningful exposition is subtle (but still head-scratching) stuff in the beginning.

But what's even worse is that the Alliance Admirals act like stupid, terrified children. Who have no sense of timing or tactics whatsoever ("How did they get past our defenses?" Oh, I don't know, maybe with the same "incomprehensible power" that you just mentioned ten seconds ago? "That's your plan?!" Gee, if I had more than five seconds because you waited until NOW to actually listen to me, I could do better than "act like ****ing commanders and soldiers, you dumb, narrow-minded idiots!")

[Farbautisonn]

Paula Deen wrote...

There's so little exposition (and much of what there is is meaningless, cringe-worthy lines from people who are supposed to be top-ranking Alliance admirals) before the Reapers literally drop down right in front of you. The only meaningful exposition is subtle (but still head-scratching) stuff in the beginning.

But what's even worse is that the Alliance Admirals act like stupid, terrified children. Who have no sense of timing or tactics whatsoever ("How did they get past our defenses?" Oh, I don't know, maybe with the same "incomprehensible power" that you just mentioned ten seconds ago? "That's your plan?!" Gee, if I had more than five seconds because you waited until NOW to actually listen to me, I could do better than "act like ****ing commanders and soldiers, you dumb, narrow-minded idiots!")

-Ive been preaching this for a while now, but I just happened to think that I couldnt have missed some post where Anderson hangs up his spurs. When the hell does he put them back on? Why? How? Is he commanded to reenter service or does he join up again after realizing that turning in his stripes after a 2 week bender in asari stripclubs was a bad move? Wat? 

Modifié par Farbautisonn, 21 février 2012 - 09:42 .

[AkiKishi]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

My point was, the trial could be a very good opportunity to familiarize the new player with these very terms and the general situation, as part of easing them in the game setting. And so i had to ask if that's something that simply didn't occur to you, or if you omitted that possibility on purpose.

It did indeed occur to me.  Ultimately, though, let me ask you this: what purpose would it actually serve to give a new player this kind of in-depth history lesson?  Is it really important at that stage in the script that they understand what a batarian is?  Or is that kind of exposition better served up later in the story, right before Shepard has to interact with some actual batarians?

A player who wanted a roleplaying game would want it,people who just want to shoot stuff probably not. With DA2 Bioware tried to target the CoD crowd (it's in interviews). Looks like with ME3 they are going for the GoW crowd.
DA2 imploded in a rather spectacular fashion once the review embargo was lifted. If EA has a review embargo on ME2 we may just see history repeat.

[tmp7704]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

It did indeed occur to me.  Ultimately, though, let me ask you this: what purpose would it actually serve to give a new player this kind of in-depth history lesson?  Is it really important at that stage in the script that they understand what a batarian is?  Or is that kind of exposition better served up later in the story, right before Shepard has to interact with some actual batarians?

I'd think the answer is obvious. If the player is given brief explanation of Batarians or whatever but still chooses to ask for in-depth explanation through their dialogue wheel, then yes, it's apparently important to that player.

Both ME and ME2 regularly allowed the player to make such calls. There's no benefit in taking that ability away and instead trying to apply some sort of universal, rigid approach.

[Dragoonlordz]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

My point was, the trial could be a very good opportunity to familiarize the new player with these very terms and the general situation, as part of easing them in the game setting. And so i had to ask if that's something that simply didn't occur to you, or if you omitted that possibility on purpose.

It did indeed occur to me.  Ultimately, though, let me ask you this: what purpose would it actually serve to give a new player this kind of in-depth history lesson?  Is it really important at that stage in the script that they understand what a batarian is?  Or is that kind of exposition better served up later in the story, right before Shepard has to interact with some actual batarians?

No it is not better later (imho), it is better done at the start so that it is done with, alllowing different developments later which builds on what done at beginning instead of filling in blanks later with less time left to build upon it . I don't know how short Bioware thinks the average gamers attention span is but it completley underestimates it's current fanbase's. It is far better starting on a firm footing with regard to the story than going off half cocked and having to fill in later. It still does not cover (even if later) what I said here and here.

Modifié par Dragoonlordz, 21 février 2012 - 10:01 .

[CaptainZaysh]

tmp7704 wrote...

I'd think the answer is obvious. If the player is given brief explanation of Batarians or whatever but still chooses to ask for in-depth explanation through their dialogue wheel, then yes, it's apparently important to that player.

Both ME and ME2 regularly allowed the player to make such calls. There's no benefit in taking that ability away and instead trying to apply some sort of universal, rigid approach.

Yeah, there is.  Exposition by definition doesn't advance the actual story, so it needs to be cut ruthlessly wherever possible.  It's story flab.

Here's a good site that explains the universally agreed basics of scriptwriting.

http://thescriptlab....tion-five-rules

When faced with the need for exposition, use these five rules as guide to live by: 
1. Eliminate exposition that isn’t absolutely necessary or that will become clear as the story moves forward.

 2. Deliver exposition in scenes that contain conflict. An argument that starts about one thing often escalates when past issues are brought into the mix.

3. Wait as long as possible before providing exposition, always looking for the moment of maximum dramatic impact to reveal it. 

4. Use brevity. Exposition doesn’t have to be a monologue. Just give us the necessary information, so we can move forward.

5. Use a character (main or supporting) whose job it is to deliver exposition: a judge, teacher, military officer, principle, politician, scientist, etc.

Yes, yes, I know point 5 specifically recommends a judge as a nice delivery mechanism for exposition!  Note points 1, 3 and 4 as counters, though, and I'm sure that elsewhere on the site will be an exhortation to start with as much pace and excitement as you can.

Modifié par CaptainZaysh, 21 février 2012 - 09:59 .

[Farbautisonn]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Yeah, there is.  Exposition by definition doesn't advance the actual story, so it needs to be cut ruthlessly wherever possible.  It's story flab. .

Only problem with your logic here is that this is a storydriven fps/rpg. In Rpgs you are usually rather dependent on and most really like "story flab". If we didnt we wouldn't go out and buy novels and magazines that provide extra "flab". Dragon Magazine wouldnt have ever gotten off the ground. Neither would many of the wikis or websites that deal exclusively with "flab".

Here's a good site that explains the universally agreed basics of scriptwriting..

-According to whom? And is all writing, scriptwriting, story writing, gamewriting, writing novels etc "universable agreeable upon"? This "cookie cutter" recepy is at best arrogant, and at worst directly misleading.

Modifié par Farbautisonn, 21 février 2012 - 10:11 .

[tmp7704]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Yeah, there is.  Exposition by definition doesn't advance the actual story, so it needs to be cut ruthlessly wherever possible.  It's story flab.

Here's a good site that explains the universally agreed basics of scriptwriting.

These are good advices if you are writing one size fits all kind of story to begin with. Which a game is not -- unlike a movie or typical book it can ask the reader if they want more exposition, and react accordingly.

[Gerther]

A great opening scene for ME3 would have balanced action and exposition.

Imagine seeing Shepard, yourself, dragged in chains into a courtroom with hundreds of aliens chatting away or screaming for your head. The inquisitor reads off the charges (based on your previous actions in the old games) and you chose to either defend your actions, show regret at the lose of life, or just not care enough to answer. You define your character right away with just a few minutes of dialogue.

Then you can have the reaper attack and all the action you want!

[Gerther]

Modifié par Gerther, 21 février 2012 - 10:19 .

[Gerther]

Modifié par Gerther, 21 février 2012 - 10:19 .

[TheRevanchist]

Gerther wrote...

A great opening scene for ME3 would have balanced action and exposition.

Imagine seeing Shepard, yourself, dragged in chains into a courtroom with hundreds of aliens chatting away or screaming for your head. The inquisitor reads off the charges (based on your previous actions in the old games) and you chose to either defend your actions, show regret at the lose of life, or just not care enough to answer. You define your character right away with just a few minutes of dialogue.

Then you can have the reaper attack and all the action you want!

Can't be any worse then an opening scene where your character is in prison for reasons you'll never understand

[ApplesauceBandit]

LAME!

[Skyblade012]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

tmp7704 wrote...

I'd think the answer is obvious. If the player is given brief explanation of Batarians or whatever but still chooses to ask for in-depth explanation through their dialogue wheel, then yes, it's apparently important to that player.

Both ME and ME2 regularly allowed the player to make such calls. There's no benefit in taking that ability away and instead trying to apply some sort of universal, rigid approach.

Yeah, there is.  Exposition by definition doesn't advance the actual story, so it needs to be cut ruthlessly wherever possible.  It's story flab.

Here's a good site that explains the universally agreed basics of scriptwriting.

http://thescriptlab....tion-five-rules

When faced with the need for exposition, use these five rules as guide to live by: 
1. Eliminate exposition that isn’t absolutely necessary or that will become clear as the story moves forward.

 2. Deliver exposition in scenes that contain conflict. An argument that starts about one thing often escalates when past issues are brought into the mix.

3. Wait as long as possible before providing exposition, always looking for the moment of maximum dramatic impact to reveal it. 

4. Use brevity. Exposition doesn’t have to be a monologue. Just give us the necessary information, so we can move forward.

5. Use a character (main or supporting) whose job it is to deliver exposition: a judge, teacher, military officer, principle, politician, scientist, etc.

Yes, yes, I know point 5 specifically recommends a judge as a nice delivery mechanism for exposition!  Note points 1, 3 and 4 as counters, though, and I'm sure that elsewhere on the site will be an exhortation to start with as much pace and excitement as you can.

Yeah, sorry, go read any classical literary work out there, and you'll see tons of exposition.

I'll take an example we're all familiar with.  The Lord of the Rings.  You cut the entire intro explanation of Sauron and the Ring.  You'd cut the dialogue at Bag End where Gandalf decides to send Frodo off.  You'd cut the scenes in the Prancing Pony with Aragorn.  You'd cut the discussion between Gandalf and Saruman.  You'd cut the entire Council of Elrond.  You'd cut the scenes in Lothlorien.  I probably missed a few things, but every bit of those scenes do nothing except give exposition, so they have to go.

Good luck with your travel montage and a couple actions scenes, because that's all that will be left.

[Farbautisonn]

f I were to have written the demo intro id have skipped the doom and gloom segment at first.

Id have moved on to the kid sequenece, but instead of having it interrupted by a beefy guy I am supposed to know, Id have completely saved him for later.

Instead Id have Shep looking out the window, getting a flashback to his own childhood, smiling at the kid. Perhaps even having a sequence where he played ball with the kid, or had some kind of interaction with him. A wave and a smile. Anything, Cheap tricks too and about as classic as it gets but it would give us more.

Enter Anderson. He is on the way to pick you up anyway, and having beefy guy vega hand you over to him is just a rushed way of introducing him to us.

You make some lame comments akin to "That kid plays outside with his ship every day... Every day for the last "x" months Ive seen him play with that damned ship. Even in the rain. Remember the days when life was that easy?" to which Anderson would gaze at the kid sternly and say something like "Year... a long time ago" with a sang froid visage... And then Anderson pulls us off to the trial with pretty much the same dialogue he has now.

There we are introduced to beefyguy Vega.

The councill says something akin to "Thanks for cooperating with this tribuneral. The Marine that picked you up, Sgt Vega (or whatever the hell he is) reports that you have cooperated fully with this councill and its need to clarify why you deemed it nessesary to blow up a Mass Relay, killing hundreds of thousands and causing a major diplomatic incident".

2 lines where Shep explains himself with dialogue interruped by loyal outbursts from both Vega and Anderson, which also sheds light onto how long Vega has known Shep and why he blew up a mass relay.A nice recap for those that didnt read the forums or play the DLCs. Keeps some sort of semblance of continuum in the story.

Id do away with the whole "Waah... what do we do, what do we do? You CAN ACT LIKE A MAN!" bit from the godfather, It sounds a bit pathetic that 3 seasoned officers havent got a bastard clue even after months of preparing a tribuneral and listening to Shepards story. Makes the alliance officer corps look like wimps and thats odd because Anderson and beefyguy Vega doesnt sound or act like wimps. They act like men in controll with selfconfidence. Those generally make it far in the military. In my feeble experience its rarely the timid and indecisive officers that make it to the very highest of ranks.

And then we would have an alarm go off and some hologram saying "gaaah... we are loosing contact with lunar base" and soon after "London has been hit". Then we could have the whole "We are under attackm, lets go call the Normandy and get aquainted with the controlls bit".

My suggestion isnt even particularily enlightened or original, its a 5 minute suggestion that has taken more time to type than to think up. And yet I think those 4 more minutes of gametime would have made one hell of a significant difference.

*Copy paste from a related post yesterday*

It would have taken a semi talented honest writer or fanfic'er about 10 minutes tops to come up with something that had greater narrative cohesion than what we got in the Demo.

[Capeo]

CaptainZaysh wrote...

Yeah, there is.  Exposition by definition doesn't advance the actual story, so it needs to be cut ruthlessly wherever possible.  It's story flab.

Here's a good site that explains the universally agreed basics of scriptwriting.

I've personally written a lot of scripts and got one independently made.  Film and a (supposed) RPG have nothing in common when it comes to writing.  You don't want someone wandering around bewildered in a game.  There's no such thing as flab when you're not forced to listen to lines but instead can choose to.  You should always be sure the core motovations get across in the basic script but you certainly should be able to ask questions in an RPG.

[Farbautisonn]

Skyblade012 wrote...
I'll take an example we're all familiar with.  The Lord of the Rings.  You cut the entire intro explanation of Sauron and the Ring.  You'd cut the dialogue at Bag End where Gandalf decides to send Frodo off.  You'd cut the scenes in the Prancing Pony with Aragorn.  You'd cut the discussion between Gandalf and Saruman.  You'd cut the entire Council of Elrond.  You'd cut the scenes in Lothlorien.  I probably missed a few things, but every bit of those scenes do nothing except give exposition, so they have to go.

Good luck with your travel montage and a couple actions scenes, because that's all that will be left.

-Dont forget to cut the appendixes too.

[CaptainZaysh]

Skyblade012 wrote...

I'll take an example we're all familiar with.  The Lord of the Rings.  You cut the entire intro explanation of Sauron and the Ring.  You'd cut the dialogue at Bag End where Gandalf decides to send Frodo off.  You'd cut the scenes in the Prancing Pony with Aragorn.  You'd cut the discussion between Gandalf and Saruman.  You'd cut the entire Council of Elrond.  You'd cut the scenes in Lothlorien.  I probably missed a few things, but every bit of those scenes do nothing except give exposition, so they have to go.

You've totally misunderstood my post (again, actually!), although I will confess that I would certainly have cut Tom Bombadil.

[AkiKishi]

That bit with the last Alliance in LOTR don't really need that. It's not like it advances the plot,just gives contexted to the history of the ring.

[AkiKishi]

Farbautisonn wrote...

Skyblade012 wrote...
I'll take an example we're all familiar with.  The Lord of the Rings.  You cut the entire intro explanation of Sauron and the Ring.  You'd cut the dialogue at Bag End where Gandalf decides to send Frodo off.  You'd cut the scenes in the Prancing Pony with Aragorn.  You'd cut the discussion between Gandalf and Saruman.  You'd cut the entire Council of Elrond.  You'd cut the scenes in Lothlorien.  I probably missed a few things, but every bit of those scenes do nothing except give exposition, so they have to go.

Good luck with your travel montage and a couple actions scenes, because that's all that will be left.

-Dont forget to cut the appendixes too.

That's almost half of Return of the King. (or maybe it was just my version of the books).

[CaptainZaysh]

Capeo wrote...

I've personally written a lot of scripts and got one independently made.  

Oh, awesome, well done!

Capeo wrote...
Film and a (supposed) RPG have nothing in common when it comes to writing.  You don't want someone wandering around bewildered in a game.  There's no such thing as flab when you're not forced to listen to lines but instead can choose to.  You should always be sure the core motovations get across in the basic script but you certainly should be able to ask questions in an RPG.

I disagree.  Asking questions to invite "As you know, Bob," expository responses strikes me as incredibly inelegant writing, whatever the medium.

[Klijpope]

A trial that would satisfy the needs of a lot of folk here would bewilder the newbies way more than the incomplete intro we have seen.

I agree writing for film and writing for an rpg are different, but they do have loads in common. And I'm not saying the intro is perfect - just that the beginning is not a wise place to use up the opportunity of a trial - use it where it will have consequences. Much more interesting.

Modifié par Klijpope, 21 février 2012 - 10:35 .