In theory, practice and theory should be the same but in practice it isn't. This idea of artsy-fartsy 4-dimensional chess by Bioware is also the normal and initial response from the lost and bewildered. "Surely they didn't mean what it looked like they meant? Surely they were writing on a 'higher level' and we mere mortals have been slow to appreciate or grasp it? Surely?" I tend to Occam's razor. Rarely fails. Now they MAY have been going for a meta-experience of indoctrination (or not) for the player but, sorry, the actual mechanics of the attempt fall flat. If they are only wanting to please a fraction of a percent of the player base, then it's a win. A fraction of a percent will "get it" and appreciate it. Or Occam's Razor suggests they ****ed up. Went for EA-style cash and ****ed the ending so they could suck more cash out of players seeking a rational ending.
Going artsy-fartsy and "meta" is a fool's errand. The vast majority of players are people out to play a good game and experience a good story and don't want nor expect artsy-fartsy meta-crap. They invested time and imagination and cash) in the game series and are emotionally invested in their character and their character's 'relationships'. That all gets the porcelein throne treatment in the end. Save the Rachni from absolute extinction? Meh. Save Rex and thus help bring the Krogan to a good future? Bah. Choose Ash? Choose Liara? Choose Tali? Pffffttt! Kill the Quarians and save the Geth? Who cares?! Save the Quarians and wipe the Geth? Bupkis! Save them both, end their silly war, and give the Quarians their homeworld back? Pshaw! None of that **** counts for...well ****.
I got your "meta" right here! In my pants. Munch on that meta.
Modifié par Getorex, 13 mars 2012 - 02:13 .




Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut






