510 réponses à ce sujet

[HiddenKING]

BobSmith101 wrote...

HiddenKING wrote...
Irrelevant. 

Regardless of which ending you get. The Mass Relays are destroyed, Normandy and it's crew land on a unknown planet (a new eden if you believe the stories), and to that the fact that the Batarians are now refugees, Turians and Asari lost their worlds.

Reconstruction will be first priority, gather the brightest minds in the galaxy, say everyone that worked in the Crucible project. This means new technology. 

Some worlds are now devastated. Which means they will need to explore, discover, and colonize new planets and systems.

And which ending you got will change all of those things.

Elaborate.
Tell me the endin you got in which the Mass Relays aren't destroyed and the Normandy Crew lost?

[Tirigon]

Amioran, I would like to hear what you have to say to my previous post.

Since I agreed to playing your game and posting more than I care to, I would be very sad if I should have already won

[Amioran]

MDT1 wrote...
First it makes no sense to decline a change just because a part of the affected people is against it, as you will with any decision find affected people that don't like it. There might be good reasons to decline something, but "I found someone who doesn't like the change" never was one.

So they should only regard opinions of those that dislike it, I get it.
Accepting and declining should be based on the same parameters, you know, you cannot pretend that they should not decline just because "they found someone that doesn't like the change" and instead accept to change it just because "they found someone that likes the change".

Two meters and two measures as always, I see.

MDT1 wrote...
They will chose the option that will promise the most expected revenue for the timeframe the executive board optimizes their revenues for (short term, long term etc.) based on the data they actually have (Sales numbers the data origin and the game itself collects and others). 

And on which data can you extrapolate something as this? Mind reading?

[Tirigon]

HiddenKING wrote...
Elaborate.
Tell me the endin you got in which the Mass Relays aren't destroyed and the Normandy Crew lost?

According to BioWare, in Control the Relays are not destroyed but merely disabled, and with the Citadel remaining and the Reapers under Shepard's control, they can be repaired swiftly.

[Amioran]

Mass effect 2 forever wrote...
1-From me forming an impression thats pretty important; especially when those you talk to are very like-minded.

And your impression is just of a very little percentual of the full picture, and you cannot either be sure in full of the impression you had.

[AkiKishi]

HiddenKING wrote...
Elaborate.
Tell me the endin you got in which the Mass Relays aren't destroyed and the Normandy Crew lost?

Done for the day PM me if you like I'll get back to you tommorow.

[Amioran]

Tirigon wrote...
As a matter of fact, yes I would want them to implement it.

A roleplaying game lives off choices; EVERY choice improves my game, even if I would never take it because I see it as wrong.

Ok, let's believe in your sincerity on the matter.

So, for example, if Bioware would decide tomorrow to make a DLC that make it possible to use swordplay as a sort of hack and slash you wil not have problems at all if they invest time on it instead of something you would like more?

So if at the time of DA:O they would have told you they were going to work on a DLC that added the possibility of changing the combat to the same as DA2 (that I know you don't like at all), that would have been perfectly fine for you either if it would have meant not working on something else you would have liked much more to have?

Both are more options. You can decide to not install the DLC and you can either decide to use it or not. I suppose the fact that they will lose time for things you clearly completely disagree with will make no difference for you, isn't it?

Why I cannot really believe this given the way many people reacted on much lesser "evil" things in the past about DLCs?

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mai 2012 - 06:28 .

[CerberusCheerleader]

Amioran wrote...

You say I don't try to comprehend but then you simply sidestep all the points I'm making. I made you examples, reply to them with other examples on the same line, in this way it is more simple to come to a consensus.

No, I was just being cute. Also: you don't tell people how they have to behave. Ok? You don't tell me how I have to respond to your posts. You can make a suggestion (which I assume you just did...)

I made you an example about the "swordplay DLC" that you completely ignored.

Yes, I ignored it because it is irelevant  And I gave you a better example: non-ending SP side-mission dlc (e.g. Omega 4) vs. ending dlc

Those who like it already, since they will know what the DLC will be about (i.e. changing the same) would have basis to consider the DLC a waste of time.

What you are saying is that you couldn't possibly enjoy a SP dlc if its story arc was an alternative ending. Is that what you are saying?

Ok everyone, listen: This is the only relevant point.

If it was true, I would cease my case. I would not expect Bioware to make a SP dlc that part of the audience couldn't possibly enjoy. But I don't see why this should be so. The question, whether a SP dlc would be a waste of time would be mostly determined by how well it's made. Even if the OP feels that way I have a very hard time believing that there are many others who do (why would they?).

Also: I cannot stress this enough: this is not a linear game or a movie (if it were a linear game or a movie I wouldn't even be here arguing), it is a non-linear RPG. It is supposed to have multiple endings, each of which may very well have its own philosophy. Get this in your head you 

Modifié par CerberusCheerleader, 01 mai 2012 - 06:31 .

[MDT1]

Amioran wrote...

MDT1 wrote...
First it makes no sense to decline a change just because a part of the affected people is against it, as you will with any decision find affected people that don't like it. There might be good reasons to decline something, but "I found someone who doesn't like the change" never was one.

So they should only regard opinions of those that dislike it, I get it.
Accepting and declining should be based on the same parameters, you know, you cannot pretend that they should not decline just because "they found someone that doesn't like the change" and instead accept to change it just because "they found someone that likes the change".

Two meters and two measures as always, I see.

 

Of course accepting or declining should be based on parameters, I just pointed out that you entire argumentation is void as you just say "there is someone who doesn't like it so Bioware can't do it" which they obviously can and already do.

Amioran wrote... 

MDT1 wrote...
They will chose the option that will promise the most expected revenue for the timeframe the executive board optimizes their revenues for (short term, long term etc.) based on the data they actually have (Sales numbers the data origin and the game itself collects and others). 

And on which data can you extrapolate something as this? Mind reading?

Simple deductive logic I guess. An executive board in a corporation is ment to create revenue for the shareholders. So I expect the responsible people also tried this when they decided for the EC DLC.

Modifié par MDT1, 01 mai 2012 - 06:33 .

[Tallin Harperson]

Tirigon wrote...

Tallin Harperson wrote...


Hmm... do you know that the people who believed in a geocentric universe had calculations which explained most -- if not all -- of the observations made about the extraplanetary phenomena? Just because something is seemingly explained doesn't mean there are not alternate explanations that work better. If there are people that want to look at alternatives to evolution I'm fine with that, and I'll listen if they have a good explanation that is better than our current conception. If you dismiss them all as "bigotted zealots" then you are no better than they are. Personally, I don't work under the assumption that we have the best explanation for everything, and doing so only leads to stagnation...

Do you know that I have a calculation that proves that women are evil?

And another that proves that 1 = 0?


Yea that's how much I give for faulty calculations.

Actually, the calculations were sound. Mathematically, they worked. It was the premise that was faulty. And that was what I was trying to say: they made the assumption that the universe was geocentric and looked for and calculated things to fit that premise. That is where you run into problems. If you believe evolution is the best and only way to explain the evidence, you've closed yourself off to other options that may be better. I say: if there are scientists that want to explore other options, go for it. They may be right, they may be wrong, but they are doing what scientists are supposed to do. So long as they use proper scientific method -- which is designed to minimize bias -- then more power to them. They don't diminish me or anyone else by having differing opinions.

In any case, this doesn't really have anything to do with the argument at hand, so I'll shut up now.

Modifié par Tallin Harperson, 01 mai 2012 - 06:36 .

[woodbyte]

Amioran wrote...
(...) It doesn't matter where the majority stands, (...)

http://forum.sportsm...38&d=1331699328

[Amioran]

CerberusCheerleader wrote...
What you are saying is that you couldn't possibly enjoy a SP dlc if its story arc was an alternative ending. Is that what you are saying?

Not exactly. I'm saying that it would the idea of it would not be accepted too well to begin with because it waste times and resources for something you disagree with from the start.

You can either learn to enjoy the story arc when it's done, because anyway they already wasted the time and you cannot do nothing about it anymore, but before it would appear a waste of time better spent for something you don't disagree so much with.

It would still be difficult (to enjoy it) because it would require a complete shift in the narrative at a certain point, and this will mean that those that will try both things will find absolutely no consistency between the two paths. For those that were already against the DLC arc to begin with, then, the prejudice will be strong, no matter what, and we know much too well from these forums how much prejudice can work against a result.

So, the only ones you can be sure will enjoy it and will not oppose it are, again, those that want the ending changed. The others will not like the idea to begin with and they will either probably not enjoy it when it's out. So, you see, we return to the same, primary, problem: on what parameter you can base a decision as this? Surely not solely on opinion.

[SalsaDMA]

This stopped being a thread about facts a lont time ago.

The way he speaks, and the way he acts towards posters, make me realize he are using the same rethorics as people arguing faith are.

Pointless debate is pointless.

[Amioran]

MDT1 wrote...
Of course accepting or declining should be based on parameters, I just pointed out that you entire argumentation is void as you just say "there is someone who doesn't like it so Bioware can't do it" which they obviously can and already do.

No, it's not "there is someone who doesn't like it so Bioware can't do it", it is "there are those that like it and those that don't like it, so Bioware cannot change it on the base of the opinion of those that don't like it because that would just mean making a change on arbitrary parameters"

MDT1 wrote...
Simple deductive logic I guess. An executive board in a corporation is ment to create revenue for the shareholders. So I expect the responsible people also tried this when they decided for the EC DLC.

The EC DLC doesn't require any of this. It just require them to see that some people didn't like the little closure. You don't need to ascertain where the majority stand or similar things, you just need to know that some don't like the thing as it is.

For a complete change the thing is different. Expanding on the story is good also for those that already like it.

[Atakuma]

I recommend people simply stop responding to Amioran and let this thread die.

[Andhaira]

This is why Bioware cannot change the ending:



They would have to redo everything.

Modifié par Andhaira, 01 mai 2012 - 06:51 .

[Amioran]

SalsaDMA wrote...

This stopped being a thread about facts a lont time ago.

The way he speaks, and the way he acts towards posters, make me realize he are using the same rethorics as people arguing faith are.

Pointless debate is pointless.

Why I get accused of this everytime by people that cannot either stand an argument and never reply anything at all of concrete apart their "I'm right because I MUST be right"? From the start of the thread I tried to argue with you but you NEVER replied to anything I wrote if not you usual two sentences (as people as you always do).

This thread IS about facts. The problem is that you NEVER showed any, as you will never do (both because also if you wanted you couldn't - apart your YouTube videos that no intelligent person would ever consider as proof of anything - and because you wouldn't have the capability of debating about them), and we both know it too well.

So why should you be really interested in them if you have no idea of what a fact really is?

[Amioran]

Atakuma wrote...

I recommend people simply stop responding to Amioran and let this thread die.

Don't worry, it will happen before.

I'm already boring of it.

I thougth I could have a meaningful debate, but it is obviously impossible in this forum, given the majority of people here that cannot do it neither if their life depended on the same.

It is like trying to debate about symbolism with the usual guy in the bar. The only thing you get after a point is: "but what you say makes no sense because.... I say so and so you make no sense".

[AlanC9]

I admire the attempt, anyway.

[Amioran]

BobSmith101 wrote...
You obviously feel this place is more important than I do. Opinions are never wrong, this is why they are opinions. One individuals opinion is no more important than anothers.

Judgments can be wrong, and also facts.

If you say that ME ending plagiarized Deus Ex that can be proved right or wrong because it's not matter of opinion.

BobSmith101 wrote...
You want to win ? It's easy just post a wall of text or do multi quoting. I can't be arsed to deal with that stuff, not worth my time.

1. I don't care to win, just to have a meaningful debate, not one where the others don't either read what you write at all (or just read it superficially, thinking what they are going to say next) just because it must be wrong to begin with.

2. You can naturally do that, it's your decision, but then pretending that I don't care to debate and I want only to be right would be a factually wrong judgement because those that want to be right don't expose many arguments in detailed form for the motive that the probability of being proven wrong on at last one of them become higher and higher the more detailed and numerous they are, no matter how "good" you are to being with (nobody can know everything).

People that want to be right do exactly the contrary. They reply with single statements, explaining nothing or almost nothing, as they go. The audience remains with the doubt if the poster has a point or not, and s/he never has the problem of proving it one way or the other.

Modifié par Amioran, 01 mai 2012 - 07:11 .

[translationninja]

Amioran wrote...

Atakuma wrote...

I recommend people simply stop responding to Amioran and let this thread die.

Don't worry, it will happen before.

I'm already boring of it.

I thougth I could have a meaningful debate, but it is obviously impossible in this forum, given the majority of people here that cannot do it neither if their life depended on the same.

It is like trying to debate about symbolism with the usual guy in the bar. The only thing you get after a point is: "but what you say makes no sense because.... I say so and so you make no sense".

No, you are not trying to "have a debate", you are trying to tell everyone else that you know better and that BioWare must not change the ending for the ending-haters because you liked it and changing it would mean stepping on your feet.

Stop hiding behind walls of text and say it already instead of hiding behind walls of pseudo-intellectual ramblings.

[SalsaDMA]

Amioran wrote...

SalsaDMA wrote...

This stopped being a thread about facts a lont time ago.

The way he speaks, and the way he acts towards posters, make me realize he are using the same rethorics as people arguing faith are.

Pointless debate is pointless.

Why I get accused of this everytime by people that cannot either stand an argument and never reply anything at all of concrete apart their "I'm right because I MUST be right"? From the start of the thread I tried to argue with you but you NEVER replied to anything I wrote if not you usual two sentences (as people as you always do).

This thread IS about facts. The problem is that you NEVER showed any, as you will never do (both because also if you wanted you couldn't - apart your YouTube videos that no intelligent person would ever consider as proof of anything - and because you wouldn't have the capability of debating about them), and we both know it too well.

So why should you be really interested in them if you have no idea of what a fact really is?

Take a hint?

And I find the rest of your post truly funny, albeit in a sad way.

Listen, you need to get out of your bubble and start receiving some real world input, cause your present attitude and behaviour isn't doing you any favours. Cut out the insults you seem to be sprinkling your posts with all the time and accept that your faith is not for everyone, nor even more than a few at most.

I'm sure it's nice to have a faith to be convinced in like you are of yours, but you need to accept when people question you about it if you try to crusade for it. So far, the only 'real' argument you produced have been along the lines of 'my opinion should count more than others', which really isn't going to convince any of us, especially when we can just look around us and dig up evidence for ourself that show quite clearly why we should disagree with you.

[Amioran]

translationninja wrote...
No, you are not trying to "have a debate", you are trying to tell everyone else that you know better and that BioWare must not change the ending for the ending-haters because you liked it and changing it would mean stepping on your feet.

And as always I get accused of this by people that factually (because you can find in the posts here) couldn't have a debate with me before, and didn't reply in detail to anything I said and instead just pretended that I wanted to be right for no matter at all (when what I do in the specific proves exactly the contrary: read my post above).

I don't know if I should be happy that this happens or not.

translationninja wrote...
Stop hiding behind walls of text and say it already instead of hiding behind walls of pseudo-intellectual ramblings.

Oh, I get it, so I should do as you do, saying "you are wrong because I say so" and that would prove that I want to have a debate with others instead.

You are right, what I'm doing it's exactly the opposite because I try to address all points in detail, it must be for this way that you people insist that I cannot have a debate, I must start doing as you do instead; I've finally found what's my error, thank you.

Good point.

[Amioran]

SalsaDMA wrote...
I'm sure it's nice to have a faith to be convinced in like you are of yours, but you need to accept when people question you about it if you try to crusade for it. So far, the only 'real' argument you produced have been along the lines of 'my opinion should count more than others',

If you say so.

My posts (and their details and lenght) proves somewhat the contrary, but I know already that "proof" is an alien concept for you, and you could never admit either an obvious thing if that would mean that it is against what you think it's true.

So, think what you want and hope it becomes true also in real life.

Bye.

[Amioran]

For this day I've finished.

I will see tomorrow if to continue or not with this torture.

See you later.