269 réponses à ce sujet

[malra]

Luc0s wrote...

The difference with ME3 is that all those "fake choices" are now gone. They're just auto-dialogue now. So our influence SEEMS less, but it really isn't.

I hope I got the qoute right anyhow, in an RPG "fake" choice as you call it matters.  That is the essence of delivering a satisfying RPG which is what the series started out as and why so many of us are now dissatisfied. see the below:

 ME1 was a space opera RPG. Although you begin with a prenamed character you are still the person who decides his beginning which provides his motives and his moral compass. these don't even necessarily have to match, i.e. a renegade sounding background may not necessarily produce a renegade shepard. we are given the option of renaming our shepards, to provide us with deeper identification, we are allowed to craft their visage and their specialties. everything in ME1 from the way we respond to the world around us to the conversations our choice for squadmates helps create certain shepards in each of our heads. this is true RPG - it is as much character building as rolling a d&d dice. because even if our shepards share a name, my shepard is my shepard.

this is entirely broken by me3. it is obvious that the writers were no longer looking to encompass every situational strand simply because of the lack of choices. instead of looking for ways to bring highly divergent characterizations of shepard into a single end - which is what was so successful about ME1 and ME2 - they pushed everyone into two basic molds Paragon and Renegad. and you are either sinking into the miasma of deperession or madness (Reaper Madness! lol) and my Shepards were always survivors whether they were big damn war heros or lone survivors

[MegumiAzusa]

noxsachi wrote...

It is the same way in gaming. For now we are limited by both writers but also by animators and level designers. A game can not diverge too far without either being incredibly short or stupidly expensive. However, just because we know this, does not mean there is a good reason to destroy the illusion of choice. Especially in a series built around that illusion, touting that as one its hightlights, and hell up until this game had delivered admirably on that promise.

You know, there were also enough people complaining about having so many fake choices that really don't change a thing. They maybe could have implemented a switch that autochooses such answers if turned on, especially as they implemented such a system anyway (which in my opinion was a bad thing to even think about). Still I wouldn't complain about automated dialoge, in my opinion it is better then before as before it was more like "what she said isn't what I just choose to say"

[Jonathan Shepard]

iamthedave3 wrote...

The nightmare sequences would have been a good time to have Harbinger turn up, come to think of it. I never liked him as a villain, Sovereign was much better written, but he's better than what we got (nothing).

The Kai Leng defeat could have been handled better. The main issue is that - oddly - Kai never gets to really shine. His appearance on the citadel is brief, and he is defeated even if he manages to kill Thane. But there's never a moment where Kai Leng just gets to look unbeatably awesome. His troll e-mail doesn't work, either.

A Virmire-like scenario that ends with Kai killing one of the squadmates would have worked effectively, I think, if it was obvious that Kai manipulated you into that situation.

This.

[failedparachute]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

noxsachi wrote...

It is the same way in gaming. For now we are limited by both writers but also by animators and level designers. A game can not diverge too far without either being incredibly short or stupidly expensive. However, just because we know this, does not mean there is a good reason to destroy the illusion of choice. Especially in a series built around that illusion, touting that as one its hightlights, and hell up until this game had delivered admirably on that promise.

You know, there were also enough people complaining about having so many fake choices that really don't change a thing. They maybe could have implemented a switch that autochooses such answers if turned on, especially as they implemented such a system anyway (which in my opinion was a bad thing to even think about). Still I wouldn't complain about automated dialoge, in my opinion it is better then before as before it was more like "what she said isn't what I just choose to say"

The thing is: they did include that button in the settings. There's a setting for "Full Decisions" and another for "Action". And the "Full Decision" Setting isn't particularly full, as there's still a large amount of auto-dialogue.

[MegumiAzusa]

Luc0s wrote...

I think you misunderstood. When I said "fake choices" i was talking about those pointless dialogue wheels in ME1 and ME2 that gave you the illusion that you could pick a dialogue option, but i reality they all had the exact same result. One example is in ME1 when Anderson asks Shepard about the beacon and what he saw. You get a dialogue wheel with the following options:

- A warning
- A war
- Our death

The choice here is a "fake choice" because whatever you choose, Shepard will ALWAYS say the EXACT SAME thing: "I saw synthetics, geth maybe, slaughtering people, butchering them."


Those fake dialogue options are gone in ME3 and I'm actually glad they're gone.

Can only agree, as in my last post these options always triggered "what she said isn't what I just choose to say" for me.

[noxsachi]

Luc0s wrote...

malra wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

The difference with ME3 is that all those "fake choices" are now gone. They're just auto-dialogue now. So our influence SEEMS less, but it really isn't.

I hope I got the qoute right anyhow, in an RPG "fake" choice as you call it matters.  That is the essence of delivering a satisfying RPG which is what the series started out as and why so many of us are now dissatisfied. see the below:

I think you misunderstood. When I said "fake choices" i was talking about those pointless dialogue wheels in ME1 and ME2 that gave you the illusion that you could pick a dialogue option, but i reality they all had the exact same result. One example is in ME1 when Anderson asks Shepard about the beacon and what he saw. You get a dialogue wheel with the following options:

- A warning
- A war
- Our death

The choice here is a "fake choice" because whatever you choose, Shepard will ALWAYS say the EXACT SAME thing: "I saw synthetics, geth maybe, slaughtering people, butchering them."


Those fake dialogue options are gone in ME3 and I'm actually glad they're gone.

I suppose it matters how you look at it. To be honest I never knew those were always the same. And I also don't entirely care. Now I am not saying an entire game full of that is good, but having a few instances of that does not diminish the impact of the dialogue wheel always popping up whenever Shepard speaks. It makes me feel like I have some control over what she says. I take that as a good thing.

[malra]

Luc0s wrote...

malra wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

The difference with ME3 is that all those "fake choices" are now gone. They're just auto-dialogue now. So our influence SEEMS less, but it really isn't.

I hope I got the qoute right anyhow, in an RPG "fake" choice as you call it matters.  That is the essence of delivering a satisfying RPG which is what the series started out as and why so many of us are now dissatisfied. see the below:

I think you misunderstood. When I said "fake choices" i was talking about those pointless dialogue wheels in ME1 and ME2 that gave you the illusion that you could pick a dialogue option, but i reality they all had the exact same result. One example is in ME1 when Anderson asks Shepard about the beacon and what he saw. You get a dialogue wheel with the following options:

- A warning
- A war
- Our death

The choice here is a "fake choice" because whatever you choose, Shepard will ALWAYS say the EXACT SAME thing: "I saw synthetics, geth maybe, slaughtering people, butchering them."


Those fake dialogue options are gone in ME3 and I'm actually glad they're gone.

I didn't misunderstand. I understand fully. for someone who plays shooters choice may not matter, but for RPG choice, even when it is illusion, matters greatly.  the fact that you keep totally igoring that suggests that you aren't really here for any sort of reasoned discussion.  but hey, thanks for your time.  as I said earlier, I'm glad there are people who found the game enjoyable, but considering the Mass Effect Universe was sold to RPG players as an RPG I think we have the right to discuss why it fails on an RPG level.

[iamthedave3]

Mikeuicus wrote...

Also, if you saw a kid get blown up in front of you in real life, I don't think you'd be spouting things like "that kid meant nothing to me", "I didn't even know him, lol". I think Shepard's reaction, whether Renegade or Paragon, is appropriate given that women, men, and children are dying on Earth by the millions per day. The kid is a way for Shepard's subconscious to personalize those losses.

Then why isn't Shepherd having horrendous nightmares about the millions of people directly killed in Arrival?

I'm not a hardened soldier directly responsible for the deaths of millions of people. It's obvious Shepherd handled it pretty well given they hardly even mention the event. It sure doesn't seem to have weighed on Shepherd's conscience much. Yet ONE CHILD IS TOO MUCH.

Don't buy it.

Not to mention, Shepherd didn't see a kid blown up in front of him/her. He/She saw the kid board a shuttle which was then blown up. That is actually a significant difference. It's the difference between watching a car crash and seeing the tangled corpses of the people inside.

[MegumiAzusa]

failedparachute wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

noxsachi wrote...

It is the same way in gaming. For now we are limited by both writers but also by animators and level designers. A game can not diverge too far without either being incredibly short or stupidly expensive. However, just because we know this, does not mean there is a good reason to destroy the illusion of choice. Especially in a series built around that illusion, touting that as one its hightlights, and hell up until this game had delivered admirably on that promise.

You know, there were also enough people complaining about having so many fake choices that really don't change a thing. They maybe could have implemented a switch that autochooses such answers if turned on, especially as they implemented such a system anyway (which in my opinion was a bad thing to even think about). Still I wouldn't complain about automated dialoge, in my opinion it is better then before as before it was more like "what she said isn't what I just choose to say"

The thing is: they did include that button in the settings. There's a setting for "Full Decisions" and another for "Action". And the "Full Decision" Setting isn't particularly full, as there's still a large amount of auto-dialogue.

Yes, wrote it a bit unclear. I meant in the existing system they should have given you the option to also display these choices, though they aren't really decisinons. As of now this setting only states decisions, it is no decision if the outcome of all possible choices are the same, as the choices itself are just useless and more disturbing.

[Evil Minion]

[quote]VigilancePress wrote...

Evil Minion-

I don't know that I can agree 100%. I agree with you in principle, but in the first game you are given background choices that include an option for a character who is very much 'do the job, doesn't matter who dies to get it done.' While I can see that same character might care enough about a single child to let it bother him (or let the child be a metaphor for the homeworld he wants to save) I still think he'd picture things differently from my Paragon for whom every life lost is a battle lost. I wouldn't mind every Shepard having nightmares about what's happening...

...I just think the game's dream sequences are just not nuanced enough to unify all those different emergent Shepards out there.[/quote]

Again, another fair point. I think it would've been great if they could've differentiated the dream sequences in such a way as to reflect YOUR Shepard.

Personally, I'm a paragon in most of my play-throughs, so that's probably why I wasn't as bothered.

However, I'm wondering if all of these subtle nuances would be within Bioware's budget.

[quote]Edit- In my analysis, I think showing the dream sequences was a mistake. I think it would have been better to have Shepard awake from the nightmare, and then describe it to someone in his/her own words, creating the impression in our minds based on choices from the dialogue wheel. It would have been more in keeping with the sense of player-determined destiny, and would have created a stronger mental image of the dreams themselves (my opinion).

Of course, if you subscribe to Indoctrination Theory, then the dreams are basically being sent to Shepard from an outside agency. In which case, his/her reaction to them is vitally important to how the ending plays out... and should determine the results of that ending. If you struggle against the dreams and 'win' you could then have an option where the hallucination breaks down and you are able to see your environment as it truly is, instead of the fantasy created in your mind by the Reapers.[/quote]

Yeah, that way might've worked better, but I suspect they wanted to show the dreams on account of it being more dramatic.

Honestly, most of ME3 was more like a play-along movie than a true RPG.




[/quote]

[MegumiAzusa]

iamthedave3 wrote...

Then why isn't Shepherd having horrendous nightmares about the millions of people directly killed in Arrival?

I'm not a hardened soldier directly responsible for the deaths of millions of people. It's obvious Shepherd handled it pretty well given they hardly even mention the event. It sure doesn't seem to have weighed on Shepherd's conscience much. Yet ONE CHILD IS TOO MUCH.

Don't buy it.

Not to mention, Shepherd didn't see a kid blown up in front of him/her. He/She saw the kid board a shuttle which was then blown up. That is actually a significant difference. It's the difference between watching a car crash and seeing the tangled corpses of the people inside.

That is the same as when you are getting reports in the news about tragedies or just knowing someone dies a horrible death because of starvation right now. It is distant. But being directly confronted with it, knowing the face of one of these makes such a thing completely different.
Could you seriously imagine watching a kid getting in a car like you descibe that blows up seconds later without any implications for yourself?

[Ashilana]

Luc0s wrote...
The choice here is a "fake choice" because whatever you choose, Shepard will ALWAYS say the EXACT SAME thing: "I saw synthetics, geth maybe, slaughtering people, butchering them."

Those fake dialogue options are gone in ME3 and I'm actually glad they're gone.

I played through ME1 and most of ME2 with a new shep just before the ME3 came out (oh, bad-decision-shepard, how sad it is that you will never see me3).  And, well I know for sure that the dialogue there is different depending on which one you choose.

[failedparachute]

Luc0s wrote...

malra wrote...

Luc0s wrote...

The difference with ME3 is that all those "fake choices" are now gone. They're just auto-dialogue now. So our influence SEEMS less, but it really isn't.

I hope I got the qoute right anyhow, in an RPG "fake" choice as you call it matters.  That is the essence of delivering a satisfying RPG which is what the series started out as and why so many of us are now dissatisfied. see the below:

I think you misunderstood. When I said "fake choices" i was talking about those pointless dialogue wheels in ME1 and ME2 that gave you the illusion that you could pick a dialogue option, but i reality they all had the exact same result. One example is in ME1 when Anderson asks Shepard about the beacon and what he saw. You get a dialogue wheel with the following options:

- A warning
- A war
- Our death

The choice here is a "fake choice" because whatever you choose, Shepard will ALWAYS say the EXACT SAME thing: "I saw synthetics, geth maybe, slaughtering people, butchering them."


Those fake dialogue options are gone in ME3 and I'm actually glad they're gone.

I can see both sides of this one. On the developer's side removing the "fake" options cuts down on the amount of work you have to do for programming  the various instances in conversations. Some of the players prefer it, as it streamlines the experience and gets them to where they want to go, whether that's advancing the plot, killing some enemies, or romancing cute alien girls.

On the other side, giving these choices to the player keeps them engaged and immersed in the conversation at hand, and while they may enjoy the other aspects of the game, the faux-freedom they allow is what they're really after, because to these gamers, the experience they are crafting is the most important part.

It would be nice if it were possible to strike a balance between the two extremes, but you can't please everyone.

[The Angry One]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Could you seriously imagine watching a kid getting in a car like you descibe that blows up seconds later without any implications for yourself?

Would we? That's not the issue. Would our Shepards?
Would yours? Yes? Okay, that's entirely reasonable.

Would mine? No. She's a hardass ruthless spacer. She's seen people melt in front of her eyes and hardly blinked.
She focuses on the big picture, millions are dying every day, civilisations are falling.
She would certainly not enjoy seeing a kid get blown up, but to be blunt she wouldn't dwell on it. At all.

[malra]

Luc0s wrote...

malra wrote...

I didn't misunderstand. I understand fully. for someone who plays shooters choice may not matter, but for RPG choice, even when it is illusion, matters greatly.  the fact that you keep totally igoring that suggests that you aren't really here for any sort of reasoned discussion.  but hey, thanks for your time.  as I said earlier, I'm glad there are people who found the game enjoyable, but considering the Mass Effect Universe was sold to RPG players as an RPG I think we have the right to discuss why it fails on an RPG level.

Okay cool. Sorry that I thought you misunderstood me.

I'm actually here for a reasoned discussion, I simply thought you misunderstood me. My bad.


I did not find Mass Effet 3 enjoyable actually. It's just that I think the "auto-dialogue" is one of the only few changed that I considered to be good.


In my opinion, ME3 was perfect when it comes to gameplay and game-mechanics. But on narrative and story-telling the game really felt too short. The plot of ME3 just plain sucked, the narrative could have been better and the story of ME3 is... well.. reduntant because of the ending.

soookay....sometimes on here it can be difficult to traverse the unheard emotional context.  for myself, I prefer the illusion of control in the RPG, I don' care for the new cinematic style, especially as a lot can be lost because of it.

[MegumiAzusa]

Evil Minion wrote...

VigilancePress wrote...

Evil Minion-

I don't know that I can agree 100%. I agree with you in principle, but in the first game you are given background choices that include an option for a character who is very much 'do the job, doesn't matter who dies to get it done.' While I can see that same character might care enough about a single child to let it bother him (or let the child be a metaphor for the homeworld he wants to save) I still think he'd picture things differently from my Paragon for whom every life lost is a battle lost. I wouldn't mind every Shepard having nightmares about what's happening...

...I just think the game's dream sequences are just not nuanced enough to unify all those different emergent Shepards out there.

Again, another fair point. I think it would've been great if they could've differentiated the dream sequences in such a way as to reflect YOUR Shepard.

Personally, I'm a paragon in most of my play-throughs, so that's probably why I wasn't as bothered.

However, I'm wondering if all of these subtle nuances would be within Bioware's budget.

Why should the outward actions you take towards others correspond 100% how you really feel? Even if you have the most badass Shep, who says he is different inside compared to the most whiny Shep? You just can't tell if all that badassery is just a mask to play over your feelings you don't want to show?
If they made it the way you just said I too wouldn't have the opportunity to that. You can't just say badass Shep is always badass in his/her mind.

[The Angry One]

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Why should the outward actions you take towards others correspond 100% how you really feel? Even if you have the most badass Shep, who says he is different inside compared to the most whiny Shep? You just can't tell if all that badassery is just a mask to play over your feelings you don't want to show?
If they made it the way you just said I too wouldn't have the opportunity to that. You can't just say badass Shep is always badass in his/her mind.

I think you're confusing internal badassery with compassion for everybody.
My Shepard simply does not have the time to think about every random person that's died, if she did she'd break down and become a vegetable.
I am perfectly okay with Shepard having feelings and expressing concern and doubt, and being troubled by the deaths of people she cares about.

This kid is nobody. He is a random person the same as the millions of other random people who died that day.
The only reason this becomes and issue is because he's a kid, and that alone is not enough of a reason for me, sorry. That wreaks of manipulation.

[Malevolence65]

noxsachi wrote...
If you want to have a nightmare, actually make it disturbing. Referance Shepard's backstory, what you saw in the beacon, or at the Collector base. Or hell, have a new sequence where you think you are awake, only things go horribly wrong and you wake up and it is a nightmare. Have us have to do something disturbing, like see our LI get huskified and we have to kill them. Something like that would impact both Shepard and the player, while running slowly after a stupid annoying kid just wastes your time.

I pretty much thought exactly this the first time I played through. There should have been nightmares about your background, reputation, and the beacon. Also, the idea of a nightmare that you think is real until the game shows you that it isn't is a very good idea.

[zarnk567]

I agree OP, nice post.

[MegumiAzusa]

The Angry One wrote...

MegumiAzusa wrote...

Could you seriously imagine watching a kid getting in a car like you descibe that blows up seconds later without any implications for yourself?

Would we? That's not the issue. Would our Shepards?
Would yours? Yes? Okay, that's entirely reasonable.

Would mine? No. She's a hardass ruthless spacer. She's seen people melt in front of her eyes and hardly blinked.
She focuses on the big picture, millions are dying every day, civilisations are falling.
She would certainly not enjoy seeing a kid get blown up, but to be blunt she wouldn't dwell on it. At all.

The Angry One wrote...

I think you're confusing internal badassery with compassion for everybody.
My
Shepard simply does not have the time to think about every random
person that's died, if she did she'd break down and become a vegetable.
I am perfectly okay with Shepard having feelings and expressing concern and doubt, and being troubled by the deaths of people she cares about.

This kid is nobody. He is a random person the same as the millions of other random people who died that day.
The
only reason this becomes and issue is because he's a kid, and that
alone is not enough of a reason for me, sorry. That wreaks of
manipulation.

If you go with that I would still say there would be always two choices:
The choice of your action, what you say, and how do you behave.
And the choice of how you feel about it. For example: are you doing something because you know you have to do it but still feel bad about it while not showing that to the outside, or you don't care and the result is all that matters?
Without both options the inner character is always predetermined.

Modifié par MegumiAzusa, 01 avril 2012 - 07:18 .