100 réponses à ce sujet

[Comrade Goby]

dw99027 wrote...

Comrade Goby wrote...

Ok well how about killing 40,000 Batarians in Arrival.

Where are the bad dreams about that?

Why isn't he mentally traumatized about that? 

300000. 
Press button= 300000 dead.
Don't press button= Galaxy dead.
That's actually an easy decision for any composed person who has experienced war. I don't think even I would have qualms about that.

You're missing the point.

You can know you have to do it like Shep knows he has to leave Earth but why didn't he go all emo about the Batarians. But he went emo about a kid he knew for 10 secs? 

[MelfinaofOutlawStar]

Comrade Goby wrote...

Ok well how about killing 40,000 Batarians in Arrival.

Where are the bad dreams about that?

Why isn't he mentally traumatized about that? 

Why, if you're a Colonist, are you not traumatized by having your family slaughtered by slavers?

Or being mind probed by an artifact?

Or seeing husks?

Or leaving a comrade behind on Virmire?

Or making the decision on which ship should perish during Sovereign's attack?

Or dying?

And being resurrected?

Or being shunned because of who you work for through no choice of your own?

Or watching people getting liquified into a genetic smoothie?

Or facing the result of that smoothie?

Why the kid? Out of all the times Shepard couldn't save someone, why the kid?  Renegade Shepard even treats it as not a big deal.

[ncknck]

"The death of one man is a tragedy, the death of millions is a statistic" © Stalin

however, no Shep should even care, because he have seen so much death already. Or at least the renegade one.

[LOLandStuff]

Because if Shepard just stood there without even blinking then ppl would be crawling here whining how the animation is poor. Or how Shepard is an emotionless bastard.

Modifié par LOLandStuff, 05 mars 2012 - 11:16 .

[Broder O]

LOLandStuff wrote...

Because if Shepard just stood there without even blinking then ppl would be crawling here whining how the animation is poor. Or how Shepard is an emotionless bastard.

See now you're deliberately twisting the issue.

It's not about Shepards direct response to seeing innocents die.
Of course s/he would be upset..

The problem is that Shepard starts have PTSD dreams about this one kid s/he did not even know while his/her life is full of tragedy.

Why this one kid? What, besides narrative imperative and forced emotional connections, makes this event so significant?

Modifié par Broder O, 05 mars 2012 - 11:19 .

[dw99027]

I answered that. That was an 'easy' decision. He is not to blame personally. Saving billions at the cost of thousands is logical. He knows he prevented innumerable deaths by taking a certain immediate action. He has no such immediate option to save the kid or the initial victims on Earth. He feels helpless.

This is one way of looking at it, and this has been my point from the start. You have to rationalise your Shep, because he's not a PnP character, hence 'limitations'. If you find this intrusive of Bioware's part, that's your prerogative. I don't. We'll simply have to agree to disagree on the amount of control we exert over our Shepard.

[LOLandStuff]

Broder O wrote...

LOLandStuff wrote...

Because if Shepard just stood there without even blinking then ppl would be crawling here whining how the animation is poor. Or how Shepard is an emotionless bastard.

See now you're deliberately twisting the issue.

It's not about Shepards direct response to seeing innocents die.
Of course s/he would be upset..

The problem is that Shepard starts have PTSD dreams about this one kid s/he did not even know while his/her life is full of tragedy.

Why this one kid? What, besides narrative imperative and forced emotional connections, makes this event so significant?

Because Shepard gets to see the only kid in the flesh in the whole Mass Effect universe die.

[dw99027]

Lol... good point.. always sadder to witness a panda bear bite it than a chicken.

[varterral]

MythicLegands wrote...

Shepard belongs to Bioware now.

Bioware: All your shepards are belong to us...u mad?

[Broder O]

LOLandStuff wrote...

Broder O wrote...

LOLandStuff wrote...

Because if Shepard just stood there without even blinking then ppl would be crawling here whining how the animation is poor. Or how Shepard is an emotionless bastard.

See now you're deliberately twisting the issue.

It's not about Shepards direct response to seeing innocents die.
Of course s/he would be upset..

The problem is that Shepard starts have PTSD dreams about this one kid s/he did not even know while his/her life is full of tragedy.

Why this one kid? What, besides narrative imperative and forced emotional connections, makes this event so significant?

Because Shepard gets to see the only kid in the flesh in the whole Mass Effect universe die.

That makes no sense...
Depending on player actions and choices Shepard has seen his/her entire family die on mindoir, entire platoon die on akuze, frined/lover die on virmire, other friends/lovers die on SM,
S/he's seen people turned into husks, turned into liquid, killed in just about all conceivable ways..

So again, give me a an actual reason why this one event would have such a big impact.

[Dreogan]

To answer the original poster: because Bioware has lost its touch.

Freaking Avina (the VI welcoming newcomers to the citadel) would have been a hell of a better Catalyst, anyway. "Thank you for deciding to destroy the Reapers. Have a nice day." <explosion>

[Ghost Rider LSOV]

Dreogan wrote...

To answer the original poster: because Bioware has lost its touch.

Freaking Avina (the VI welcoming newcomers to the citadel) would have been a hell of a better Catalyst, anyway. "Thank you for deciding to destroy the Reapers. Have a nice day." <explosion>

That would have more trolling, because the 4th option would be "What do you think is best?", with the usual Avina response.

[push2play]

Oh for ****'s sake, cut the excuses and forced explanations. BioWare yet again dropped the ball and forced us/Shep to experience PTSD through a single, anonymous kid he's never met, rather than through losing those he most cared about. Because we should all cry for anonymous kids we have no emotional connections with.

[dw99027]

push2play wrote...

Oh for ****'s sake, cut the excuses and forced explanations. BioWare yet again dropped the ball and forced us/Shep to experience PTSD through a single, anonymous kid he's never met, rather than through losing those he most cared about. Because we should all cry for anonymous kids we have no emotional connections with.

Nice to see that 'forced' explanations' are countered with rash conclusions...

[Fyk0]

xtorma wrote...

Allworkandlowpay wrote...

MythicLegands wrote...

On Noveria you can get the investigator killed  then lie about it then walk out like nothing happened.

Following the previous criteria. That event fails on the following two things I asked for:

Please cite one example in any game where Shepard either:
1) Kills an innocent person.
2) Says after killing a person that he did it for fun.

He didn't kill the investigator (indirectly getting the investigator killed is not the same) and he didn't make any statement indicated that he enjoyed killing people in the process. 

Next.

Telling jack to murder that crazy dude in her loyalty mission was pretty sicko.

And even I play mostly paragon, I alyways tell Jack to shoot him or I do it myself, he just seem to be too dangerous.

[brfritos]

dw99027 wrote...

You want absolute freedom in creating a character? Play PnP. You want an engrossing story and deep character interactions delivered through gigs of recorded and voice-directed dialogue? Deal with limitations. I swear, people think devs just pull games out of a wishing well..

Or play Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas, you have complete freedom and control of your character, you kown.

Is not something "impossible", it requires only a little good will from the devs.

[Roflmonger]

Oh man. That 9 year old kid. He was on Earth.

He had a toy ship.

I think I'm about to cry.

[Collider]

Renegade Shepard isn't an unfeeling monster. He's just a ruthless hardass.

[push2play]

brfritos wrote...

dw99027 wrote...

You want absolute freedom in creating a character? Play PnP. You want an engrossing story and deep character interactions delivered through gigs of recorded and voice-directed dialogue? Deal with limitations. I swear, people think devs just pull games out of a wishing well..

Or play Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas, you have complete freedom and control of your character, you kown.

Is not something "impossible", it requires only a little good will from the devs.

Damn right. Especially F:NV, where you can pretty much kill anyone you wish and be the ultimate monster. Hell, one of the DLCs can be over in a space of 10 minutes if you choose that route. The thing is, it's very hard to actually go through the game killing people. I could never do it. I guess I'm just not a sociopath.

[dw99027]

brfritos wrote...

dw99027 wrote...

You want absolute freedom in creating a character? Play PnP. You want an engrossing story and deep character interactions delivered through gigs of recorded and voice-directed dialogue? Deal with limitations. I swear, people think devs just pull games out of a wishing well..

Or play Fallout 1, 2 and New Vegas, you have complete freedom and control of your character, you kown.

Is not something "impossible", it requires only a little good will from the devs.

I have played those games and they were great. But 'deep character interactions'? Not possible with a mute protagonist. Hence 'limitations'. To each his own, my friend. I grew up on BG1 but I prefer a more cinematic feel nowadays.

[eye basher]

Xayoz wrote...

dw99027 wrote...

Yup. OP, you're really misinterpreting your own character.

Nop. He is doing this thing called role-playing.
Crazy, rait? I mean, who does that in a rpg?

i don't it's just a game.

[Dreogan]

Collider wrote...

Renegade Shepard isn't an unfeeling monster. He's just a ruthless hardass.

He cries in his bunk every night over the 300000 batarians he killed. Offscreen. 

[Shehi]

Well answer is simple actually: because writers, in real life, most probably, have never been to war-zones where kids, women and the rest are killed in a minutely basis. They don't understand soldier's psychology, or don't care. They just push the story and try to make it "emotional" franchise hoping it sells well, and as a result we get non-realistic, not-well-sitting-and-fitting BS which only spoils all the fun. Shepard just witnessed half of the Earth exterminated, and I am sure s/he can see from windows how everyone are massacred, and now he is showing special emotion towards on kid?! That's bad writing, plain and simple.

[Candidate 88766]

dw99027 wrote...

You want absolute freedom in creating a character? Play PnP. You want an engrossing story and deep character interactions delivered through gigs of recorded and voice-directed dialogue? Deal with limitations. I swear, people think devs just pull games out of a wishing well..

Exactly. For the sake of the story, Shepard needs to be defined to at least some extent. For example, no matter what the player may want, Shepard is fighting to save the galaxy. 

[azerSheppard]

Because bioware writers think they can create valid emotions in players, by killing of people we don't even know.