216 réponses à ce sujet

[Amioran]

Oh, and since the RPGCodex elitists are watching (and commenting, playing the victims' part as I said they would):

"What a ****. Too bad it's in the game owners' circle jerk section. It would be fun to hear him explain exactly how he thinks Mass Effect treats 'the philosophical theme "order vs. chaos"' meaningfully. "

Already we have the first insults, good. I expected nothing better.

Apart that you can create an account without problems (this is the general discussion, you don't need to have a game of Bioware to use this forum part, so please don't play the part "I cannot... or... or... I will... I swear I will") then as I said I already explained all this, so if you are really interested (and you do not just want to insult and have the last word to look good at the eyes of the other great "experts" there) you can find those threads.

But to have a meaningful debate with me on this point (that goes above the usual insult or "I am right no matter what you say" reply) you would have at last to know the theme, a thing you obviously don't (given the fact that you don't have any idea of what I'm talking about and you either believe I'm making it up). So, apart insulting me and pretending you are right with your "friends" I don't think you will have nothing really serious to add, but you can at last try.

Just two little hints: the major occidental religions are funded on the same philosophical theme (i.e. in the term of narrative of the same, the bible and the coran - the fall from heaven of Lucifer is a typical example). Most major philosophers wrote and debated about the theme (Kant, Shopenahuer, Nietzsche, Adorno, Heiddeger, Sartre, Ouspensky, Hegel, Csikszentmihalyi etc. etc.) and it is espounded in many books (as the Paradise Lost of Milton, for example, or the Ulysses of Joyce).

Modifié par Amioran, 23 avril 2012 - 06:17 .

[Getorex]

Amioran wrote...

Oh, and since the RPGCodex elitists are watching:

"What a ****. Too bad it's in the game owners' circle jerk section. It would be fun to hear him explain exactly how he thinks Mass Effect treats 'the philosophical theme "order vs. chaos"' meaningfully. "

Already we have the first insults, good job.

Apart that you can create an account without problems (this is the general discussion, you don't need to have a game of Bioware to use this forum part, so please don't play the part "I cannot or I will...") then as I said I already explained all this, so if you are really interested (and not just want to insult and have the last word to look good at the eyes of the other great "experts" there) you can find those threads.

But to have a meaningful debate with me you would have at last to know the theme, a thing you obviously don't (given the fact that you don't have any idea of what I'm talking about and you either believe I'm making it up). So, apart insulting me I don't think you will have nothing really serious to add, but you can at last try.

Just two little hints: the major occidental religions are funded on the same philosophical theme (i.e. in the term of narrative of the same, the bible and the coran - the fall from heaven of Lucifer is a typical example). Most major philosophers wrote and debated about the theme (Kant, Shopenahuer, Nietzsche, Adorno, Heiddeger, Sartre, Ouspensky, Hegel, Csikszentmihalyi etc. etc.) and it is espounded in many books (as the Paradise Lost of Milton, for example, or the Ulysses of Joyce).

Ahem...that's "Koran", not "coran".  Or, if you wish, "Qur'an".  The bible, koran, etc, do NOT get into discussions of chaos vs order to any meaningful extent.  And so what if they do?  They're crap and, like ME3, self contradictory all within the borders of the same book! 

[LinksOcarina]

Pedrak wrote...

LinksOcarina wrote...

. For me, my biggest peeve is the charge that characters had no depth to them.  I have done several articles on the depth characters have had in Mass Effect, and why it's important to the entire franchise. Let's face it, most of us played the game because of the characters surrounding it. The story was always a throny issue following typical tropes of high-fantasy good vs evil and Space Opera logic, but the characters kept us coming back for the fives years. At least, for me.

.

He mostly liked the characters though. With a few exceptions - and frankly, characters like Allers and Vega or Kai Leng I didn't love either. He obviously loathed the romances but that's not the same thing.

It felt like he was complaining about the characters being one note, despite being well written. It kind of like a back-handed compliment if you ask me.

[Tigerman123]

I see my trolling has borne fruit :innocent:

[Amioran]

Getorex wrote...
Ahem...that's "Koran", not "coran". 

In my language it's written with the C. Sorry for the mistake in english.

Getorex wrote...
The bible, koran, etc, do NOT get into discussions of chaos vs order to any meaningful extent. 

????

All the old testament of the bible is based on that theme. Of what the hell are you talking about?
For the Koran it's the same. All the occidental religions have at the root the concept of duality, and more explicity God is order, man is chaos (for a good tractate on this read "The Gospel according to St. Bernard Shawn").

Getorex wrote...
And so what if they do?  They're crap and, like ME3, self contradictory all within the borders of the same book! 

Ok, they're crap, you are right... (apart your obvious idiotic statement -what this have to do with what I said is beyond me, but whatever).

As for self-contradiction, EVERY PHILOSOPHICAL THEME CONTAINS CONTRADICTIONS (if it didn't the theme would have no sense because every sentence contains a contradiction in itself).

OMG. Have you any idea of what you are babbling about? It cannot exist a theme (especially if complex) without a contradiction.

Modifié par Amioran, 23 avril 2012 - 06:31 .

[sp0ck 06]

Arngeld wrote...

Ah yes, "RPG Codex." An obscure hive of elitists engaging in feigned highbrow criticism to mask its collective inability to enjoy any game newer than Fallout. We have dismissed this site.

I haven't read the article in question, but I've little doubt that some of its points hit home because, you know... low hanging fruit. We all have criticisms of the game(e.g. why do I have to click purchase in two different places on the screen in order to buy the thing that I indicated I wanted to purchase by clicking on the item? Just let me double click to buy). Give the source, however, I highly doubt I would agree with the author's conclusion.

Lol yeah.  Those guys need serious help.  At least they don't need to get jobs and move out of moms basement cause the only games "the codex" deems worthy can be played on 50$ PCs from craigslist.

This community can be tiresome, but that hive?  ugh.

[Phaedon]

Due to a busy schedule I won't be actually be playing the game for another month at least, but in the meantime, I'll leave this comment from RPG Codex.

The first was a lost oppertunity. The second was carried mainly by the BRO moments with Wrex, Mordin and Garrus. The third looked like a steaming pile of ****, set off warning bells. If everything i've read and seen on the internet so far is even remotely correct, I dodged a bullet by not even contaminating my interwebz with a pirated copy.

the **** butthurt is delicious, mind you. I like how they accuse us of liking no games whatsoever, even though this forum has a long and prestigious list of things we generally love

Link for butthurt ****s who are too afraid to search the forum on their own:
http://www.rpgcodex....ay-games.55367/

You can add Jagged Alliance 2, Vampire the masquerade bloodlines, Deus Ex, System Shock 1+2, thief 1+2 and UFO: Enemy unknown (XCom UFO defense in kwanzania) to the list of games that we generally around here.

Please calculate the time needed for you to spot a single game released post-2004. I'll award you with cookies for it. Virtual cookies. That follow your browsing history forever.

Almost incredible how one can manage to parody one's self.

I would ask the OP what s/he considers members of r/gaming or /v/ if s/he considers members of 'RPG'Codex as esteemed, but then I noticed that s/he seems to be a rather active member of the forums.

Modifié par Phaedon, 23 avril 2012 - 06:42 .

[addiction21]

RPGcodex?

[beyondsolo]

Amioran wrote...

beyondsolo wrote...
You seem to have a very strong position in this. Unfortunately, I've never had the opportunity to read one of your posts where you presented "evidence," or "proved someone wrong." All I've read so far from you in this thread are references to those events and your statement about how people's opinions turn them into elitist snobs. Would you please point me to one of your posts (or repost your argumentation here) so I can get an idea of the points you're making about the game? Thank you.

One thread was about the green ending. You can find it in the spoiler forum. I couldn't reply no more so some things got unanswered but it will at last give a good background (this is probably the most complete and with more details).

Another thread was "If You're Keeping The Endings in The Name of Integrity..."; you can find my explanations starting from page 3/4 to "aLucidMind" and others.

Still another thread was about having an happy ending instead of what we have (don't remember perfectly the name and I cannot find it in the cronology but it was of about 2 days ago).

Thank you for pointing me to those threads. I've found and read the first two after some searching. I have to say that you do have some interesting points. There is, however, one major problem in the way you present your argumentation. Since you claim to be a writer yourself, you probably have a certain idea of what kind of effect your style of writing has. What you do is that you start personally attacking other users for what they've said, always in a way that it just doesn't break any rules. But you are definitely provoking confrontations that start derailing the actual topic and end up in picking apart what exactly the other has said, more often than not with a subtext of "you are inferior to me."

While I think that what you are saying about the game itself does have some merit, though I don't agree with all of it, I have to say that the way you keep saying it makes it incredibly hard for people to see your points between condescending comments. What condescending comments? Stuff like this: http://social.biowar...2896/4#11131980 (speaking of elitists and all).

I politely suggest that you stick to the topic at hand instead of focusing so intently on the argumentation of others, and if you absolutely feel like deconstructing someone's post, it'd probably be more convincing to them if you did it in a less aggressive manner.

[Getorex]

Amioran wrote...

Getorex wrote...
Ahem...that's "Koran", not "coran". 

In my language it's written with the C. Sorry for the mistake in english.

Getorex wrote...
The bible, koran, etc, do NOT get into discussions of chaos vs order to any meaningful extent. 

????

All the old testament of the bible is based on that theme. Of what the hell are you talking about?
For the Koran it's the same. All the occidental religions have at the root the concept of duality, and more explicity God is order, man is chaos (for a good tractate on this read "The Gospel according to St. Bernard Shawn").

Getorex wrote...
And so what if they do?  They're crap and, like ME3, self contradictory all within the borders of the same book! 

Ok, they're crap, you are right... (apart your obvious idiotic statement -what this have to do with what I said is beyond me, but whatever).

As for self-contradiction, EVERY PHILOSOPHICAL THEME CONTAINS CONTRADICTIONS (if it didn't the theme would have no sense because every sentence contains a contradiction in itself).

OMG. Have you any idea of what you are babbling about? It cannot exist a theme (especially if complex) without a contradiction.

We are going WAY off topic here but...

I grew up with that bible nonsense and it NEVER got into "chaos vs order".  Never.  I have no idea how YOU were hose-fed your bible nonsense but it sure sounds nonstandard.  Duality is NOT = chaos vs order.  Total nonsequitor.

I will also disagree with your statement as fact that all philosophical themes contain contradictions.  There are entire areas of philosophy that seek to NOT self-contradict.  Self-contradiction is a bug, NOT a feature.  

You are investing ME with WAY more than the creators of the thing had in mind, way WAY more than they intended, and WAY WAY WAY more than it deserves.  It IS = to KotOR = DA = Dungeons and Dragons.  They are the same and NONE of them are in any way, shape, or form a philosophical treatise on the meaning of life.  They are silly, distracting diversions.  They are GAMES with no deeper intent than to be a game.  Seriously, you really really need to quit throwing so much of your mental time into mere poorly written games.  Go deeper.  Deeper as it OUT of  computer games written on the fly for a quick profit.  THAT is the overall 'philosophy' behind ALL of the games you are reading WAY too much into.

You want deeper, then read novels by professional authors, not mere pulp fiction writers.

[Mylia Stenetch]

Getorex wrote...
You are investing ME with WAY more than the creators of the thing had in mind, way WAY more than they intended, and WAY WAY WAY more than it deserves.  It IS = to KotOR = DA = Dungeons and Dragons.  They are the same and NONE of them are in any way, shape, or form a philosophical treatise on the meaning of life.  They are silly, distracting diversions.  They are GAMES with no deeper intent than to be a game.  Seriously, you really really need to quit throwing so much of your mental time into mere poorly written games.  Go deeper.  Deeper as it OUT of  computer games written on the fly for a quick profit.  THAT is the overall 'philosophy' behind ALL of the games you are reading WAY too much into.

You want deeper, then read novels by professional authors, not mere pulp fiction writers.

Not to dissuade yourself on this. I think he going off on a point I do not fully agree with. Still I know me and my friends love to do silly things like this like overanalyze to think of some weird ideas it has. If you want to go "deep" on a VERY BASIC stance there is Lawful vs chaotic. That is the closest it relates to chaos vs order. It is very, VERY small but if someone wanted to dig that heavy then it is their choice.

[MaldororAzrael]

Obvious troll post is obvious.

[Amioran]

Getorex wrote...
We are going WAY off topic here but...

I grew up with that bible nonsense and it NEVER got into "chaos vs order".  Never.  I have no idea how YOU were hose-fed your bible nonsense but it sure sounds nonstandard.  Duality is NOT = chaos vs order.  Total nonsequitor.

If you cannot understand that the theme behind the bible is order vs. chaos I don't know what to say you, really (and it would take too much time to explain the why here). As for duality = chaos vs order it's perfectly sequitur in this case because the duality is grown by the two contrary aspects (that form a duality).

Then you are mistaking your dislike for the bible as relevant. It has nothing to do with the philosophical theme being "good" or "bad". The fact that you like or not like what's written there it has nothing to do with the fact that the philosophical theme is complex and a good philosophical theme in itself (that has created a lot of useful debates/books/studies in the years and opened a lot more derived themes).

I'm not christian (all the contrary) and I don't follow the bible. Still I have not problem liking the Divine Comedy of Dante or the Paradise Lost of Milton (that are books derived from it) just because you don't need to agree with the bible (or whatever else) to appreciate the theme behind in all its intricacies.

Getorex wrote...
I will also disagree with your statement as fact that all philosophical themes contain contradictions.  There are entire areas of philosophy that seek to NOT self-contradict.  Self-contradiction is a bug, NOT a feature.  

Name one. It doesn't exist. Every branch of philosophy contains self-contradictons. The fact that some philosopher can search for a no contradicton doesn't change this (it is a sort of utopic search, knowing you cannot find it, as the alchemist can search the "elixir of life" knowing that in any case they will never find it; the joyce is in the journey).

It is in the nature of a philosophical theme. The motivation is simple: language cannot contain knowledge in its total sense and when it tries to comunicate the same it necessarily contradicts something in the process (just because whatever action contains also its contrary). There's no way around.

Getorex wrote...
You are investing ME with WAY more than the creators of the thing had in mind, way WAY more than they intended, and WAY WAY WAY more than it deserves.

Actually I'm astounded by the fact that the majority here don't know anything at all about this. It is a well-known theme that has had some of the major books written based on the same.

Even a movie that all of people here know is based on the same: The Matrix (from another angle, more esoteric - and so it may seem different since it is taken from a different perspective -, but the root it's the same). Naturally the fact that that movie is well done or not is irrelevant.

Getorex wrote...
They are GAMES with no deeper intent than to be a game. 

You cannot write a narrative (of whatever type) without using a philosophical theme. All the narrative has at last one on where to base itself upon.

The fact here is that this particular theme is complex. Probably Bioware expected many to have a little more background on it (given its "popularity"). Probably they were wrong...

But this is a typical fault of authors (even I commited it some times). Expecting others to understand something you take for granted.
 

Getorex wrote...
Seriously, you really really need to quit throwing so much of your mental time into mere poorly written games.

There's nothing to "throw" or "make-up". I'm not talking about IT here.
The way Bioware approached the synthetics and the way the developed the narrative it's all consistent with the theme. Either the Starchild and the three choices at the end.

If a thing smells as a fish, looks as a fish and taste as a fish I call it a fish.

Modifié par Amioran, 23 avril 2012 - 07:16 .

[Bleachrude]

Imperial Sentinel Arian wrote...

About choices and consequences, he likes Krogan/Salarian 'cure the genophage' and Geth/Quarian mission but:

Sadly, it isn't all that good, and the 'Bioware choices' which lead to at-best-cosmetically-different outcomes are out in force. If a party member died in previous installments, their role will be replaced by a functionally (and often word-perfect) equivalent stunt double: Mordin gets replaced with a scientist Salarian, Grunt with another Krogan Leader, Jack with a leader of biotic students, Tali with another Quarian Geth expert, etc. Supposedly important plot decisions count for little: destroy the Collector base and Cerberus still 'recovers' the human reaper and hangs it up in their headquarters, kill the Rachni queen and you still meet another Rachni queen 'created' by the Reapers, get Anderson to be councillor and Udina takes over the role anyway. And so on. It got to the point that whenever I saw an interesting little wrinkle in the game it made me wonder 'how would things have turned out differently?' I reminded myself that, in all likelihood, the difference would have been cosmetic. There are only so many times you can offer illusory choice before you prejudice the audience against you.

Er, this is where I tend to disagree with some of the review.

If Tali is dead and/or Legion are dead, it makes your job so much harder to actually ge the "good" ending to the quarian-geth conflict.

Hell, I think if you actually gave Legion to cerebus after the dead reaper mission in ME2, it literally is impossible to make peace between the geth and the quarian...t 

[xsdob]

Seboist wrote...

Damn good review. It shows how heavily flawed most of ME3 and the series was contrary to the fanboys notion that it was "ruined in the last 10 minutes".

And that right there showed me how very slanted and bias this review was going to be. Sorry, you coldn't have turned me off faster if the terms "death panels" "Liberal media" "baby killer" "obama's socialist health care" and "we need a lee harvey oswald for this era" were all in the same article, and not as a denouniation.

[CerberusCheerleader]

Beginning
...
The Reapers prosecute their genocidal war in the least intelligent way imaginable. They don't opt for a decapitating strike on the Citadel - the center of galactic co-ordination. Nor do they limit transit through the mass relays (which they control) dividing the galaxy to be picked off piecemeal. Instead, they spread themselves out in a long grinding war of attrition against everyone at once, giving our heroes enough time to hitch hike around to save the galaxy. Absurd!

Structure
...
 

What he writes about the story (his points Beginning and Structure) is spot on. And I would argue that this may even be a bigger problem than the ending because the ending is just one event (Bioware could even change it if they wanted) but this here is the basis for the entire game. And it makes no sense.

Modifié par CerberusCheerleader, 23 avril 2012 - 07:19 .

[Getorex]

Mylia Stenetch wrote...

Getorex wrote...
You are investing ME with WAY more than the creators of the thing had in mind, way WAY more than they intended, and WAY WAY WAY more than it deserves.  It IS = to KotOR = DA = Dungeons and Dragons.  They are the same and NONE of them are in any way, shape, or form a philosophical treatise on the meaning of life.  They are silly, distracting diversions.  They are GAMES with no deeper intent than to be a game.  Seriously, you really really need to quit throwing so much of your mental time into mere poorly written games.  Go deeper.  Deeper as it OUT of  computer games written on the fly for a quick profit.  THAT is the overall 'philosophy' behind ALL of the games you are reading WAY too much into.

You want deeper, then read novels by professional authors, not mere pulp fiction writers.

Not to dissuade yourself on this. I think he going off on a point I do not fully agree with. Still I know me and my friends love to do silly things like this like overanalyze to think of some weird ideas it has. If you want to go "deep" on a VERY BASIC stance there is Lawful vs chaotic. That is the closest it relates to chaos vs order. It is very, VERY small but if someone wanted to dig that heavy then it is their choice.

I'll grant you that.  Nonetheless this person IS investing a chaotic series of 3 games (THERE'S your "chaos" right there...the game series itself because the "story" was created on the fly as the game was developed rather than doing it the RIGHT way and having a story a priori and creating the game from that) with WAY more meaning and depth than it actually has or was actually even intended.  It's like taking the movie "Dumb and Dumber" and trying to invest it (via ex post facto argument) with deep meaning on the "human condition" when it never had that and was never intended to have that. 

Hell, the movie "Monty Python and the Meaning of Life" had vastly more actual meaning to it than the Mass Effect series, and in particular, infinitely more meaning and logic than the ending of ME3.  What I see is merely some sad person who has a personal emotional NEED to love the ME series and its very shallow characters to an unhealthy extent.  So much do they need to love ME and defend its clear shortcomings that they actually spend real time in their life trying to patch and paste the nonsense together into a "grand meaning".  THERE IS NO MEANING.  There is no "grand".  There is only a game that was poorly thought out from day 1, game 1.  All that followed was on a contingency basis and ad hoc.  The last one was WAY more ad hoc than the previous two, particularly with regards to the ending.

[xsdob]

Read up to the part about "the beggining"...it made me rage quit faster than the ending did.

Modifié par xsdob, 23 avril 2012 - 07:23 .

[Bleachrude]

I do agree though that the Reapers simply controlling the citadel made no sense at the end....Not sure what purpose it served to have the reapers move it to earth? Why not simply have the battle at the citadel in the Widow nebula.

That said, the quarians didn't attack during the reaper invasion...the quarians geared up and attacked BEFORE the batarians got run over. They were actually winning until the geth went to the reapers...

[Getorex]

CerberusCheerleader wrote...

Beginning
...
The Reapers prosecute their genocidal war in the least intelligent way imaginable. They don't opt for a decapitating strike on the Citadel - the center of galactic co-ordination. Nor do they limit transit through the mass relays (which they control) dividing the galaxy to be picked off piecemeal. Instead, they spread themselves out in a long grinding war of attrition against everyone at once, giving our heroes enough time to hitch hike around to save the galaxy. Absurd!

Structure
...
 

What he writes about the story (his points Beginning and Structure) is spot on. And I would argue that this may even be a bigger problem than the ending because the ending is just one event (Bioware could even change it if they wanted) but this here is the basis for the entire game. And it makes no sense.

Sure.  Absolutely.  The end.

OK, I will extemporize.  You want a story that accomplishes the same result as the ME storyline with the Reapers cleaning the galactic slate on a regular basis but does so self-consistently AND without ever getting into why it happens (because that is beyond what can be understood) then read Jack McDevitt's "Engines of God".  Hard scifi (not science fantasy).  It has a long-lost alien race somewhat akin to the Protheans in it, called the "Monument Makers".  It has something akin to the Reapers (the "engines of god" in the title) that show up like clockwork (logically explained...the clockwork) and destroys any technical civilizations found.  Bioware could have/SHOULD have based their series on this book...or on Greg Bear's "Forge of God" and its sequel, "Anvil of Stars", which has a similar inexplicable civilization destroying/planet busting alien force in play...hard scifi again, no space magic at all.  BASE it (not flatout copy) upon either of those and you cannot go wrong because it makes sense within the context of the story.  It flows to an ending, in both cases, that pulls no deus ex machina crap out of anyone's @ss.  No space toddlers need apply.  No green, red, blue explosions.  No gratuitious demises.

No epic fail.

Modifié par Getorex, 23 avril 2012 - 07:32 .

[Mylia Stenetch]

Getorex wrote...
I'll grant you that.  Nonetheless this person IS investing a chaotic series of 3 games (THERE'S your "chaos" right there...the game series itself because the "story" was created on the fly as the game was developed rather than doing it the RIGHT way and having a story a priori and creating the game from that) with WAY more meaning and depth than it actually has or was actually even intended.  It's like taking the movie "Dumb and Dumber" and trying to invest it (via ex post facto argument) with deep meaning on the "human condition" when it never had that and was never intended to have that. 

Hell, the movie "Monty Python and the Meaning of Life" had vastly more actual meaning to it than the Mass Effect series, and in particular, infinitely more meaning and logic than the ending of ME3.  What I see is merely some sad person who has a personal emotional NEED to love the ME series and its very shallow characters to an unhealthy extent.  So much do they need to love ME and defend its clear shortcomings that they actually spend real time in their life trying to patch and paste the nonsense together into a "grand meaning".  THERE IS NO MEANING.  There is no "grand".  There is only a game that was poorly thought out from day 1, game 1.  All that followed was on a contingency basis and ad hoc.  The last one was WAY more ad hoc than the previous two, particularly with regards to the ending.

I am not denying you point that it is looking into it the point of chaos vs order. To me the obession some people have who hate and love the game is not healthy. Where people are trying to find every piece they can find to show they hate it while people who love it are making what they want, it is an unhealthy ordeal that is spreading in other games also.

I am not disagreeing with you on that, it is extensive. Sometimes it is just fun to look into something what you think is a theme with friends over a drink and flesh it out. Also technically the gand meaning of the game is just Mass Effect; play it. I do not think it was poorly thought out from day one, I have seen much worse planning than this could come. It just followed the same building points from SW:KoToR. It was good writing (not good just means good/okay), and some interesting mechanics. What made it popular beyond belief is the illusion of choice and people becoming in love with the characters.

[Sgt Stryker]

Getorex wrote...

OK, I will extemporize.  You want a story that accomplishes the same result as the ME storyline with the Reapers cleaning the galactic slate on a regular basis but does so self-consistently AND without ever getting into why it happens (because that is beyond what can be understood) then read Jack McDevitt's "Engines of God".  Hard scifi (not science fantasy).  It has a long-lost alien race somewhat akin to the Protheans in it, called the "Monument Makers".  It has something akin to the Reapers (the "engines of god" in the title) that show up like clockwork (logically explained...the clockwork) and destroys any technical civilizations found.  Bioware could have/SHOULD have based their series on this book...or on Greg Bear's "Forge of God" and its sequel, "Anvil of Stars", which has a similar inexplicable civilization destroying/planet busting alien force in play...hard scifi again, no space magic at all.  BASE it (not flatout copy) upon either of those and you cannot go wrong because it makes sense within the context of the story.  It flows to an ending, in both cases, that pulls no deus ex machina crap out of anyone's @ss.  No space toddlers need apply.  No green, red, blue explosions.  No gratuitious demises.

No epic fail.

I could get behind this, provided that the ending is victorious and uplifting (Not Hudson/Walters "victorious and uplifting").

Mylia Stenetch wrote... 
I am not denying you point that it is looking into it the point of chaos vs order. To me the obession some people have who hate and love the game is not healthy. Where people are trying to find every piece they can find to show they hate it while people who love it are making what they want, it is an unhealthy ordeal that is spreading in other games also. 

To which I have to respond with this song. 

Modifié par Sgt Stryker, 23 avril 2012 - 07:37 .

[Kidd]

Most of that review's criticisms are true to some degree, but I'd not be so quick to say they ruin the experience completely. ME3 is hardly a perfect game, even aside from the ending it cannot reach the greatness of BG2 and ME2. But it is by no means not worth playing for an RPG fan.

Still, something positive came out of the review. Lots of names in that rpgcodex list of "rpgcodex approved"-list of games and I intend to look through a few of them. Some, such as Torment, Fallout and Arcanum I've already played. But many are new to me.

Of course, seeing Eye of the Beholder listed makes me question just what it takes to make the list - Diablo does the plot-void, no deeper-than-numbered-armour-class-character defining, real-time-with-cooldowns dungeon delving thing much better and is nowhere to be seen on the list after all

EDIT: Flavour for those of the rpgcodex who venture here! Since bioware does too much Only the Chosen One has the Ability to Defeat One True Evil plots, apparently, what about them Dragon Age 2? Pretty welcome variation, I'd agree. Hm, though this is merely for rpgcodex people, please don't make this a DA2 thread now X)

EDIT2: For future reference, Menckenstein, you are the one who will have to PM me and not the other way around kkthx 

Modifié par KiddDaBeauty, 23 avril 2012 - 07:44 .

[Getorex]

Mylia Stenetch wrote...

Getorex wrote...
I'll grant you that.  Nonetheless this person IS investing a chaotic series of 3 games (THERE'S your "chaos" right there...the game series itself because the "story" was created on the fly as the game was developed rather than doing it the RIGHT way and having a story a priori and creating the game from that) with WAY more meaning and depth than it actually has or was actually even intended.  It's like taking the movie "Dumb and Dumber" and trying to invest it (via ex post facto argument) with deep meaning on the "human condition" when it never had that and was never intended to have that. 

Hell, the movie "Monty Python and the Meaning of Life" had vastly more actual meaning to it than the Mass Effect series, and in particular, infinitely more meaning and logic than the ending of ME3.  What I see is merely some sad person who has a personal emotional NEED to love the ME series and its very shallow characters to an unhealthy extent.  So much do they need to love ME and defend its clear shortcomings that they actually spend real time in their life trying to patch and paste the nonsense together into a "grand meaning".  THERE IS NO MEANING.  There is no "grand".  There is only a game that was poorly thought out from day 1, game 1.  All that followed was on a contingency basis and ad hoc.  The last one was WAY more ad hoc than the previous two, particularly with regards to the ending.

I am not denying you point that it is looking into it the point of chaos vs order. To me the obession some people have who hate and love the game is not healthy. Where people are trying to find every piece they can find to show they hate it while people who love it are making what they want, it is an unhealthy ordeal that is spreading in other games also.

I am not disagreeing with you on that, it is extensive. Sometimes it is just fun to look into something what you think is a theme with friends over a drink and flesh it out. Also technically the gand meaning of the game is just Mass Effect; play it. I do not think it was poorly thought out from day one, I have seen much worse planning than this could come. It just followed the same building points from SW:KoToR. It was good writing (not good just means good/okay), and some interesting mechanics. What made it popular beyond belief is the illusion of choice and people becoming in love with the characters.

I'm with you 100%.   Sure, I like looking into something, some theme, some game, some story and expanding on it or discussing it among friends.  Sometimes something like that can actually produce real world good ideas too.  Unhealthy runs deep.  I remember back when ME2 was new in some of the Tali-themed threads, there were a few people who were WAY too attached to the cartoon character of Tali.  Some people admitted to thinking about "her" all the time and wishng they could be with "her" all the time, even dreaming of "her".  OK, I was a bit of a "Talimancer" or whatever the other term was for the Tali-afflicted back then...I thought the voice actor did a solid job of "enlivening" Tali with real personality and charm but, seriously...sucking thoughts of a cartoon/fictional character into your real life and expending inordinate ATP energy fantasizing about "her" is, as you say, unhealthy.  The "poor health" extends beyond mere romantic love for a fictitious character for some around these parts to include the actual story itself.  I am angry at Bioware because I did spend ~$120 and over 100 hours of play on a game and series that, despite the plot holes and illogic in parts, was done well enough to suck up a good deal of free time only to have them flash it blatantly into my face at the end that I was a TOTAL chump and sucker by making a trivial and incoherent end to the whole thing.  

I mean, damnit! I don't like to play swords, bows-and-arrows, animal skin and middle ages armor games!  I hate that done-to-death sh*t.  Mass Effect gave me something more than an FPS and something I liked instead of swords and sorcery...and then threw it down the toilet.  I'm spoiled as far as computer games go now because I'd like something akin to ME...scif instead of wizards and warriors...and there just isn't anything out there.  And now I cannot even enjoy going back and replaying the ME series.  

[Bleachrude]

Since when was Me ever presented as hard sci-fi????

I'm almost 100% positive that ME1 was explicitly said by Bioware to be a homage to 70s space opera?

Am I mixing up another series?!?!?