Arian Dynas wrote...
Makrys wrote...
Arian Dynas wrote...
Makrys wrote...
Guys... do we honestly think Mac Walters and Casey Hudson are brilliant enough to think up the IT though? They alone crafted the end. I am just doubtful that Walters could write something so complicated and brilliant. The guy has not impressed me with his plot writing. I'm beginning to become a bit doubtful of the IT, personally.
Which saddens me...
*cracks his knuckles*
Ok, in defense of our good buddy Mac, let's look at a few things.
One, the idea that Mac Walters and Casey Hudson wrote this alone, just them, with no outside input, is a complete load of crap. Putting aside the fact that Bioware themselves denied this, that the supposed source who put out this idea in the first place denied this, and setting aside the fact that I personally highly doubt Casey Hudson OR Mac Walters are anywhere near that arrogant, consider a few things;
1. There is no way. NONE that it could have possibly made it's way into the script without being seen by the entire writing team, no possibility of it whatsoever. it would have to get past the writing team, the design team, the marketing team, the testers, the test audience AND Dr. Musyka himself without being questioned. I find the odds on that to be long to the point of absurdity.
2.Let's see here, Casey worked on KotOR, famous for what? Oh right a plot twist. Mac is a psychology major, meaning he is capable of understanding the human mind, and knows about mental diseases and processes, in fact I would be willing to bet you the concept of indoctrination was his to begin with.
3. Both have been on board since ME1, they both remain VERY familiar with the series, this literally spits in the face of what they made, they would have to have brain damage to not notice this.
4. The plot writing of Mass Effect, while good, has never been paticularly strong. Mass Effect is driven not by the plot, but by its characters, it is a VERY character driven story in fact, and Mac was involved with alot of that, seeing as he was a major writer in ME 1 and co-lead writer in ME 2.
In reference to your first point, I was unaware of that. I simply had heard the rumor numerous times and assumed it had been true. Didn't know it had been denied multiple times. So I wasn't claiming that, simply stating what I had heard alledgedly happened. Your case makes more sense though. And honestly, I never thought that whole idea of them alone writing the ending made much sense if any at all. So, I agree.
In reference to two, that is some very interesting information. I seem to recall hearing that awhile back and totally forgot it, and totally forgot or never even knew it was Walters. That is indeed very interesting.
Three, agreed. Always stated this in defense of IT. Goes against all their work. Makes no sense to do that.
Four, also agreed, although I thought the plot of the first game was great personally. Two, was much less complicated and much more character driven in my opinion though. Much less about the plot and more about the characters. I think ME3 was a good blend, personally.
Overall, your points are very convincing. I just hope to God to your right.
Is it possible they planned the EC to reveal the twist, but didn't expect the backlash from the original endings so they had to move forward, announce it, and maybe proceed with it sooner than planned? To me honestly, the EC is what confuses me about the IT. The way they've handled it.
I don't doubt it. This is just me putting that baby to rest. Also, you ever notice that really the big divide about IT is who you beleive is lying? If you beleive IT you think Bioware is telling the truth and the Guardian is lying, if you don't beleive IT, you think Bioware is lying. Seeing as "Bioware is lying since they don't want to look bad" is the only dismissal of this paticular point well...
Mac is apparently of the opinon he's the one who frittered his life away learning psychology whereas Casey did something useful and became an engineer. But I think that was a joke.
Exactly.
Well..... the plot of ME 1 is simple and fairly pedestrian, it's very traditional, and THAT IS NO BAD THING! A simple plot is not necessarily bad if it's done well, which Mass Effect was, and in addition it had a few good twists you didn't expect. ME2 was almost straightforward actually, it was refreshingly Orwellian in style, which is why I highly HIGHLY doubt ME3 is an allegory like many Sci-Fi writers and apologists are claiming it to be, a "metaphor about the nature of the universe as an uncaring entity of which fate is unavoidable" or some such tosh as that. You do not switch styles in the same story without a clear divide dudes, this is basic 101 writing.
So what about the EC? If the IT is true, Biowas has basically lied though. We did not get what they promised before release. And Gamble has said the EC was not planned and that it only happened because of the backlash. Is he lying, or is that true? I've always assumed he was lying because PR told him to so that the IT plan wouldn't be revealed.
However, Weekes and Merizan have hinted all over the place that the EC was planned. How they've handled the EC is what doesn't make any sense to me in regards to the IT... or am I missing something?
Modifié par Makrys, 06 juin 2012 - 04:17 .
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut
