621 réponses à ce sujet

[ArkkAngel007]

Remember how cheesy Star Trek was (still is)? Yeah, I loved it then too.

[AdmiralCheez]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Remember how cheesy Star Trek was (still is)? Yeah, I loved it then too.

OMG Trek yesssss....

Every time I run into something that strikes me as cheesy, I go watch an episode from season one of the original.

[Blacklash93]

slimgrin wrote...
Oh...and 'KROGAN AIR DROP!!! RAUAAUAGAGRR!!' Thought I had Wrex on my team, not Grunt.

It probably has to do with the writers liberally sharing/passing characters and plots around to each other and newer writers who join in.

It's really hurt this series, I'd say. We have a bevy of lore errors and inconsistent characterization because of this team writing method. In this case Wrex's character suffered.

Thank God Dragon Age does this differently, with certain lore and characters assigned to specific writers throughout the series. That way we at least get good consistency with the setting and characters. That's the way it should be done.

Modifié par Blacklash93, 15 février 2012 - 03:47 .

[HolyAvenger]

mmm tasty cheese...

[N7Raider]

FlashedMyDrive wrote...

It's not just the lame writing, it's ALL of the writing.

-The lame kid
-The plot holes
-The vacuous characters
-The cliche missions
-The rushed plot

Let's not forget the AMAZING opening sequence:

>"Hi Shepard!"
>"Oh no rapers!" =(
>"Shep wut do???"
>"WE FIGHIT THEM!"
>Boom boom blam blam
>"The raper accidentally the kid!"
>"Imma save the unverse now, kthxbye"

Taking out the trial was the perfect decision. Who needs story development when you can just get straight to the action. You know what? Having a story is a distraction. There needs to be a mode where you just shoot stuff in a long, blank corridor, that way the gamers can focus on what really matters.

there were no plot holes in this and the trial wouldn't have developed the plot it would've only recapped what happened in ME2 that's not moving the story forward.  The missions weren't cliche either that's absurd.  
As for the writing you people obviously don't know cheesy writing when you hear it, go play Final Fantasy XIII-2, the arrow through time and river of time lines, now those are truly cringe worthy.  Or go watch the 2009 Star Trek, the "changing the past is cheating" line is just as cheesy, "you can't help me" or "more than one" are not even bad.  

[slimgrin]

The intro seems very truncated to me, even generic. But then I've played both games and I have a few questions that need answering before the Reapers magically single out Shepard and try to blow her and the council to bits. All of this is mere minutes into the game. No back story, no motivations, and the council - if you thought they were idiots before... I dunno, the intro to ME2 was so much better. This just seems flat.

Modifié par slimgrin, 15 février 2012 - 03:41 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Survival is hiding out in bunkers? Are you kidding me? What kind of fool would coincide hiding out in a bunker until death with survival?

Again, what kind of fool would completely dismiss the Council's help? Knowing perfectly well that they have no ****ing chance at survival if they don't get help? Seriously, what kind of idiot would dismiss galactic help to stay and die in a blaze of glory?

You trying to explain this idiocy is goddam hilarious.

Wow, I have completely lost all my respect for you!  Thanks!

Look, when you've got Reapers landing NOW, you don't have time to do anything but run and hide (or, alternatively, grab your gun and start praying).  And, hell, maybe Shepard thinks s/he'd do more good on Earth, fighting the Reapers in person, while someone else handled the diplomacy, ESPECIALLY after the Council turned him/her down so many times before.

Shepard doesn't want Earth to be all alone in the fight, but s/he also doesn't want to leave it to burn.  To not be right on the front lines right where the Reapers are, to have to leave Earth behind, leave the fight in someone else's hands...  That should be a big deal for Shepard.

I think there's a lot of implied depth here.  I mean, think about it--Anderson has always been Shepard's mentor.  Anderson was the one trying to pull the political strings on Shepard's behalf, while Shepard went headlong into enemy territory against impossible odds.  Suddenly, that role is reversed, and Anderson has to hold the line while Shepard appeals to the politicians.  It's a dramatic change, one that Shepard, the hero, naturally resists.

Come on, man, this is The Hero's Journey 101.

You are seeing depth where there is none. Implied depth? With what you have done, basically head-canoning all of this, could give Johnny Bravo the depth of The Godfather.

What you have essentially done is come up with a Shepard that fits that train of thought; that believes staying on Earth and dieing as opposed to actually attempting to fight is what needs to be done. You've made him think that what is happening on Earth is actually a fight. IT IS NOT A FIGHT, it is a harvesting. No one there has any chance of surviving, they are getting slaughtered. 

What you fail to take into account is that the majority of people out there don't like their Shepard's acting foolishly sacrificial. You may like it, but foolish Shepards don't fit into everyone's character.

Modifié par Gibb_Shepard, 15 février 2012 - 03:41 .

[Grey34]

i think this whole thread is just cheezy complaining, the amount of cheeze that's oozing from this thread could be put on 100 pizza's

[Darth Death]

Blacklash93 wrote...

Darth Death wrote...

Yeah, but it gets old after awhile. And it also brings lame excuses way certain things happen within the story (can't say do to ME3 spoilers). ME could have been a more complex story without the usage of indoctrination to simplify everything.   

Then talk to Drew about that and don't blame the writers of ME3 for keeping the Reapers resourceful.

Indoctrination doesn't simplify anything. It creates conflicts where there wouldn't be and makes the Repaers more than giant space robots who can go pewpewpew. It gives the Reapers character and cosmic-horror flavor they need to be interesting.

Then would you be ok with the idea of your entire crew turning against you (out of the blue) because they're indoctrinated? The possibilities are endless. Personally, I don't mind the concept of 'mind control' if it's done right. Also I was not blaming anyone.   

[best_eva]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

Survival is hiding out in bunkers? Are you kidding me? What kind of fool would coincide hiding out in a bunker until death with survival?

Again, what kind of fool would completely dismiss the Council's help? Knowing perfectly well that they have no ****ing chance at survival if they don't get help? Seriously, what kind of idiot would dismiss galactic help to stay and die in a blaze of glory?

You trying to explain this idiocy is goddam hilarious.

Wow, I have completely lost all my respect for you!  Thanks!

Look, when you've got Reapers landing NOW, you don't have time to do anything but run and hide (or, alternatively, grab your gun and start praying).  And, hell, maybe Shepard thinks s/he'd do more good on Earth, fighting the Reapers in person, while someone else handled the diplomacy, ESPECIALLY after the Council turned him/her down so many times before.

Shepard doesn't want Earth to be all alone in the fight, but s/he also doesn't want to leave it to burn.  To not be right on the front lines right where the Reapers are, to have to leave Earth behind, leave the fight in someone else's hands...  That should be a big deal for Shepard.

I think there's a lot of implied depth here.  I mean, think about it--Anderson has always been Shepard's mentor.  Anderson was the one trying to pull the political strings on Shepard's behalf, while Shepard went headlong into enemy territory against impossible odds.  Suddenly, that role is reversed, and Anderson has to hold the line while Shepard appeals to the politicians.  It's a dramatic change, one that Shepard, the hero, naturally resists.

Come on, man, this is The Hero's Journey 101.

You are seeing depth where there is none. Implied depth? With what you have done, basically head-canoning all of this, could give Johnny Bravo the depth of The Godfather.

What you have essentially done is come up with a Shepard that fits that train of thought; that believes staying on Earth and dieing as opposed to actually attempting to fight is what needs to be done. You've made him think that what is happening on Earth is actually a fight. IT IS NOT A FIGHT, it is a harvesting. No one there has any chance of surviving, they are getting slaughtered. 

What you fail to take into account is that the majority of people out there don't like their Shepard's acting foolishly sacrificial. You may like it, but foolish Shepards don't fit into everyone's character.

yeah you're in no position to be saying what has depth and what doesn't that's entirely subjective. 

[Kasai666]

FluffyScarf wrote...

I liked the demo. The Sur'Kesh level was great. The intro though...it's as bad as Lagrim's beginning.

Dude, shut the hell up about Skyrim. The game was good, albeit a weak main story. So please, either shut it or get the hell of the boards. 

[AdmiralCheez]

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

You are seeing depth where there is none. Implied depth? With what you have done, basically head-canoning all of this, could give Johnny Bravo the depth of The Godfather.

What you have essentially done is come up with a Shepard that fits that train of thought; that believes staying on Earth and dieing as opposed to actually attempting to fight is what needs to be done. You've made him think that what is happening on Earth is actually a fight. IT IS NOT A FIGHT, it is a harvesting. No one there has any chance of surviving, they are getting slaughtered. 

What you fail to take into account is that the majority of people out there don't like their Shepard's acting foolishly sacrificial. You may like it, but foolish Shepards don't fit into everyone's character.

And a Shepard that doesn't mesh with what I described above?  A Shepard that doesn't say all those stupid things?  A Shepard that doesn't want to jump headfirst into the fight?  Also just headcanon.

Pot, meet kettle.

[FluffyScarf]

Not until they shut they hell up about ME3 having a weak main story.

[ArkkAngel007]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

Remember how cheesy Star Trek was (still is)? Yeah, I loved it then too.

OMG Trek yesssss....

Every time I run into something that strikes me as cheesy, I go watch an episode from season one of the original.

I lost my old collection sadly enough...

[AdmiralCheez]

ArkkAngel007 wrote...

I lost my old collection sadly enough...

YOU FOOL!

I don't think we can stay friends after this...

(j/k)

[ref]

FluffyScarf wrote...

Not until they shut they hell up about ME3 having a weak main story.

Once again, people are entitled to thier own opinion.

[Kasai666]

FluffyScarf wrote...

Not until they shut they hell up about ME3 having a weak main story.

That still doesn't give you the right to talk about a completly different genre of a game. If anything, pick a game thats a sci-fi shooter and bash that. Plus, have you heard of the word "relative"? Just because you think something is bad, doesn't mean it is. 

[Travie]

Arbiter156 wrote...

name and explain why certain lines are bad/ cheesy + back up your argument with rational reasoning rather than opinion otherwise im not gonna see your point.

honestly half of the people who complain about story/writing couldnt write to save their lives.

You don't need to be a singer to recognize bad singing.

You don't need to play the guitar to recognize a poor player.

Get this foolishness out of your head.

Modifié par Travie, 15 février 2012 - 03:51 .

[Gibb_Shepard]

AdmiralCheez wrote...

Gibb_Shepard wrote...

You are seeing depth where there is none. Implied depth? With what you have done, basically head-canoning all of this, could give Johnny Bravo the depth of The Godfather.

What you have essentially done is come up with a Shepard that fits that train of thought; that believes staying on Earth and dieing as opposed to actually attempting to fight is what needs to be done. You've made him think that what is happening on Earth is actually a fight. IT IS NOT A FIGHT, it is a harvesting. No one there has any chance of surviving, they are getting slaughtered. 

What you fail to take into account is that the majority of people out there don't like their Shepard's acting foolishly sacrificial. You may like it, but foolish Shepards don't fit into everyone's character.

And a Shepard that doesn't mesh with what I described above?  A Shepard that doesn't say all those stupid things?  A Shepard that doesn't want to jump headfirst into the fight?  Also just headcanon.

Pot, meet kettle.

You missed my damn point. The majority of people out there who don't want their Shepards to be foolish martyrs have extremely OOC moments in the intro. Only a Shepard with THAT train of thought can possibly say those things with any kind of conviction.

What the intro has done is canonize Shepard into a grunt with no diplomatic intelligence whom, like you said, would rather stay and die on Earth than look at the bigger picture. It takes the Roleplaying out of Roleplaying game. That is my problem, my Shepard acting like yours, when they are evidently two completely different people.

[Balek-Vriege]

Gemini1179 wrote...

There needs to be a thread where all the "It's only a Demo" people sign up and all the "I don't expect the full release will be much better" crowd sign up and then after the game is released the winning group gets to make an "I told you so" thread.

Examples of terrible lines:

Most of the lines are easily explained away.  I'm actually surprised by the ones you picked:

"We've gone over your mission reports and data you've collected, but it's all just theory to us." - Anderston to Shepard 

And that is bad why exactly?  Galactic leadership does not recognize Reapers existing.  It doesn't matter if Hackett or Anderson believe Shepard.  What counts is that Alliance Command and the Council believe him/her.  They have seen the evidence and disregarded it as theory.  "We've" and "Us" refers to the Alliance.  There is nothing wrong with that sentence even when it's taken out of context.

"We've gone over your mission reports and data you've collected, but it's all just theory to us." - Anderston to Shepard

"The Reapers?" "If I knew that-" -Anderson to Shepard after Anderson's conversation with Hackett who apparently has complete control of the Alliance's Navy says he'd stake his life on the fact that the Reapers were indeed coming not 10 minutes before.

Hackett doesn't have full control of the Alliance Navy, Alliance Command and the PM does.  Hackett is in control of mobilizing the fleets to meet an unknown force heading their way.  It doesn't mean it's Reapers and even though Hackett/Anderson (moreso Hackett) think it's the Reapers, Alliance Command is just beginning to come around to that idea.  Neither Anderson or Hackett are sure.  Shepard is more sure by the time he/she gets briefed by the committee.

"This isn't about strategy or tactics, it's about survival." - ...what? Let's all run around screaming and hopefully some of us will survive.

"This, this is your plan?" - really? Noooo, actually my F****** plan was for the galaxy to prepare for the last three years!

The committee is obviously shocked and scared out of their minds with that "This, this is your plan?" and their overall hopeless mood.  They acknowledge that Shep's answer was not what they were expecting and the hopeless nature of the comment wasn't lost on them.  Your reaction to that line is definitely natural, but is doesn't make the line(s) stupid when character ingame have the same reaction.  They thought the crazy Shep who was right all along would actually have a plan but Shep is saying what you're saying:  It's basically too late, we fight or we die and hope something comes up along the way.  That something being Shep finding a way to stop them of course.  If the Reapers hadn't interrupted the committee hearing I think Shep might have gone into detail.  Like "evac everyone you can and rally somewhere else."  They basically end up doing this anyways.

"People are dying!" - oh, the humanity! (we don't actually see anyone die... or anyone at all)

Use some common sense and critical thinking here.  We see the committee get totalled, a couple buildings blown up, ships destroyed, entire fleets wiped out, fire raining from the sky, lasers going off all over the place and mutant things everywhere but no one is dieing? Again how is this back writing save for you overeacting to the line?

"You knew the Commander?" "I used to."- Seriously? I wanted my Shep to punch Ash. Where did she get off being so high-and-mighty? 

First of all it's the military and the Commander would be jailed when he/she is trying to get some info on a possible Reaper invasion.  Punching Ash would not make sense and would be bad/childish writing.

Modifié par Balek-Vriege, 15 février 2012 - 03:54 .

[super4star]

ok finally i got it

http://img163.images...5218/zeroft.png

[super4star]

imageshack.us/photo/my-images/163/zeroft.png/

Modifié par super4star, 15 février 2012 - 03:56 .

[FlashedMyDrive]

N7Raider wrote...

FlashedMyDrive wrote...

It's not just the lame writing, it's ALL of the writing.

-The lame kid
-The plot holes
-The vacuous characters
-The cliche missions
-The rushed plot

Let's not forget the AMAZING opening sequence:

>"Hi Shepard!"
>"Oh no rapers!" =(
>"Shep wut do???"
>"WE FIGHIT THEM!"
>Boom boom blam blam
>"The raper accidentally the kid!"
>"Imma save the unverse now, kthxbye"

Taking out the trial was the perfect decision. Who needs story development when you can just get straight to the action. You know what? Having a story is a distraction. There needs to be a mode where you just shoot stuff in a long, blank corridor, that way the gamers can focus on what really matters.

there were no plot holes in this and the trial wouldn't have developed the plot it would've only recapped what happened in ME2 that's not moving the story forward.  The missions weren't cliche either that's absurd.  
As for the writing you people obviously don't know cheesy writing when you hear it, go play Final Fantasy XIII-2, the arrow through time and river of time lines, now those are truly cringe worthy.  Or go watch the 2009 Star Trek, the "changing the past is cheating" line is just as cheesy, "you can't help me" or "more than one" are not even bad.  

The trial and other earlier scenes could have set the stage and tone, recapped on past events, developed the situation, and built a personal and emotional attachment to Earth and the new people you meet, making the subsequent attack more devastating.  A good writer knows how to lay down a solid foundation before tearing it all down. Creating unnecessary and blatant story devices (such as the kid) in order to make people feel bad is a clear example of bad writing. Mass effect 3's into was dull and awful. You could cut the entire thing out and it would have made no difference.

You may as well have started Mass Effect 3 on the Citadel seeing as everyone already knows that the Reapers were going to invade Earth, showing it happen is  essentially pointless by your logic.

Modifié par FlashedMyDrive, 15 février 2012 - 04:00 .

[Genshie]

Travie wrote...

Arbiter156 wrote...

name and explain why certain lines are bad/ cheesy + back up your argument with rational reasoning rather than opinion otherwise im not gonna see your point.

honestly half of the people who complain about story/writing couldnt write to save their lives.

You don't need to be a singer to recognize bad singing.

You don't need to play the guitar to recognize a poor player.

Get this foolishness out of your head.

I like this human! HE/SHE UNDERSTANDS! I give you example A.

Modifié par Genshie, 15 février 2012 - 04:00 .

[FluffyScarf]

Did you like or dislike Lagrim? Because that trash had the exact same flaws as ME3.