A curiosity to me is why so many people are complaining about so-called auto-dialogue in ME3 and comments complaining that Shepard said things that "their" Shepard wouldn't have said. I think this whole concept is really a fallacy as Shepards story, overall actions, and trajectory was always predetermined, even in ME1.
For example, you never truly have the option of refusing to complete any of the main missions. You are not free to expel squad mates at your whim, or invite any other characters to join you. You can only explore Romance options at times Shepard finds it appropriate to do so.
If Shepard was "my" Shepard, I would manage my relationships far different than Shepard allows us. Maybe ME succeeded in creating some ruse that this character is truly "ours" because one in a while we choose Option A or Option B ( with either choice really leading you to the same overall result anyway), but I never felt that I was doing anything other than playing a Role that was mostly per-written.
I don't really understand how so many see this differently as though they really had al that much to say in who this character is and what he ends up choosing to do.
Shepard was never "MY" Shepard
Débuté par
London
, juin 03 2012 06:36
Retour en haut
#2
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 06:56
o Ventus
-
- Members
- 17 275 messages
The argument is made because ME3 restricts the player control to such a staggering degree, which ME1+2 never did. The control wasn't infinite, but it was more than we have now.
It's not a fallacy, since there is no established canon the the ME universe (Barring the overarching story elements, like Saren and the Collectors). So yes, every Shepard is the product and creation of the player and is under their whim, to an extent.
It's not a fallacy, since there is no established canon the the ME universe (Barring the overarching story elements, like Saren and the Collectors). So yes, every Shepard is the product and creation of the player and is under their whim, to an extent.
Modifié par o Ventus, 03 juin 2012 - 06:57 .
#3
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 06:59
The Sarendoctrinator
-
- Members
- 1 947 messages
Some things, like when to start a romance, might have to be limited because they can only put so many options into the game. And some things have to be limited because it wouldn't make sense otherwise, like giving up and not fighting the Reapers. (Actually, there is an option to avoid a few main missions in ME2. Tali's recruitment can be skipped, and if people have the DLC squadmates to increase their numbers, I believe they can avoid Illium entirely.)
But there are many of ways to play Shepard, if people put a lot of thought into creating a character and use the options available to them. Or are you saying there's no difference in between a Paragon or Renegade, one who agrees with the genophage and one who condemns it, one who romances a character and another who can be downright cruel to that very same character? Players can create a personality for their Shepards through any and all of these choices. If they complain about the autodialogue, it's usually because it contradicts something their Shepards had expressed in an earlier dialogue.
But there are many of ways to play Shepard, if people put a lot of thought into creating a character and use the options available to them. Or are you saying there's no difference in between a Paragon or Renegade, one who agrees with the genophage and one who condemns it, one who romances a character and another who can be downright cruel to that very same character? Players can create a personality for their Shepards through any and all of these choices. If they complain about the autodialogue, it's usually because it contradicts something their Shepards had expressed in an earlier dialogue.
#4
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 07:01
MidnightRaith
-
- Members
- 595 messages
What role-playing game ever truly gives anyone complete control over the character? The OP you typed describes many RPGs. Most gamers do in fact realize that much of the PC is out of their control. Be it for plot or how they get to treat the supporting NPCs. However, the thing about a PC is that it is a brick character. You are able to project your own thoughts into the character that motivates their actions.
Ask people on BSN why "their" Shepard killed the Rachni Queen in ME1. It is a scripted event, one of two choices and that part is out of their control. However, what makes Shepard "their" Shepard is why the player made that choice. Be it because it would be stupid to release a species that previously decimated the galaxy or something reason that is entirely different. Then there is the option to save the Queen and the motivations that players had for that choice. Shepard doesn't go into depth as to why they made the choice they did in-game. I believe it was just a very general response to the Council if you chose to speak with them.
Because of this, it creates the illusion that the player is making these choices and that Shepard is the player, thus the "My" Shepard bit. When it comes to the dialogue wheel, there are more choices in ME1 and 2 and that leads to more variety and with more variety that creates more motivations behind each choice. With more motivations, you can feel like you are making these decisions in-game based on what your character would do. When there is too much of the game that takes control away from the player, you step back from what makes an RPG a RPG when it comes to story mechanics.
When you look at most western RPGs, most of the dialogue responses are written out for you and you don't get to truly say what you yourself wanted to say. What you could do is role-play. That is a big difference. Like the above, motivation and thought is largely behind each choice you make in an RPG in regards to dialogue. RPGs like Bioware's are about making your own character and molding it into something you identify with. Why else i there an option to make your own face for each Shepard? Why are there dialogue choices at all? Especially in ME1 where we get more variety? The point is to craft your own characters based on what is provided to you.
As evidenced by the many posters on this board, you can get much variety based simply on what we were given. No RPG is truly about "freedom." I just think you're missing the point of what these people are trying to say when they talk about "their" Shepards. It's not about having total control. It's about having enough choice to create a character that players can identify with and use to project their motivations behind the character. When you take away that choice, then it starts to leave RPG-ville and go more into Shooter Town.
Ask people on BSN why "their" Shepard killed the Rachni Queen in ME1. It is a scripted event, one of two choices and that part is out of their control. However, what makes Shepard "their" Shepard is why the player made that choice. Be it because it would be stupid to release a species that previously decimated the galaxy or something reason that is entirely different. Then there is the option to save the Queen and the motivations that players had for that choice. Shepard doesn't go into depth as to why they made the choice they did in-game. I believe it was just a very general response to the Council if you chose to speak with them.
Because of this, it creates the illusion that the player is making these choices and that Shepard is the player, thus the "My" Shepard bit. When it comes to the dialogue wheel, there are more choices in ME1 and 2 and that leads to more variety and with more variety that creates more motivations behind each choice. With more motivations, you can feel like you are making these decisions in-game based on what your character would do. When there is too much of the game that takes control away from the player, you step back from what makes an RPG a RPG when it comes to story mechanics.
When you look at most western RPGs, most of the dialogue responses are written out for you and you don't get to truly say what you yourself wanted to say. What you could do is role-play. That is a big difference. Like the above, motivation and thought is largely behind each choice you make in an RPG in regards to dialogue. RPGs like Bioware's are about making your own character and molding it into something you identify with. Why else i there an option to make your own face for each Shepard? Why are there dialogue choices at all? Especially in ME1 where we get more variety? The point is to craft your own characters based on what is provided to you.
As evidenced by the many posters on this board, you can get much variety based simply on what we were given. No RPG is truly about "freedom." I just think you're missing the point of what these people are trying to say when they talk about "their" Shepards. It's not about having total control. It's about having enough choice to create a character that players can identify with and use to project their motivations behind the character. When you take away that choice, then it starts to leave RPG-ville and go more into Shooter Town.
Modifié par MidnightRaith, 03 juin 2012 - 07:03 .
#6
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 11:47
Fredvdp
-
- Members
- 6 187 messages
Agreed. The example I often use is that when Joker tells his inappropriate joke, there are only two options which are both the same. I like the joke and I want my Shepard to be amused, but that was not an option even if it would make sense to put that option in there.o Ventus wrote...
The argument is made because ME3 restricts the player control to such a staggering degree, which ME1+2 never did. The control wasn't infinite, but it was more than we have now.
#7
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 12:05
fainmaca
-
- Members
- 1 617 messages
So, OP, by your reasoning there is also no 'MY' Revan, Grey Warden, or whatever they call the Jade Empire character. Also none of my TOR characters are my own.
You can only fit so much into a video game. There's no technology yet that can allow you to do whatever you please, be it make out with a Hutt or pick your nose in front of the Citadel Council. Its the job of the game developer to give the illusion of individuality, and Bioware completely skipped that to make a uniform Shepard everyone got. Shepard was a blank slate we got to impose our own mindset on for two games. Without player input, they're a soggy brick, nothing more. So having a game where that crucial ability to input the player's attitude is removed/substantially lessened, Bioware gave us a painfully bland character with nothing going for them. They turned Shepard from an idealised image in the player's head to the most uninteresting protagonist on the planet.
You can only fit so much into a video game. There's no technology yet that can allow you to do whatever you please, be it make out with a Hutt or pick your nose in front of the Citadel Council. Its the job of the game developer to give the illusion of individuality, and Bioware completely skipped that to make a uniform Shepard everyone got. Shepard was a blank slate we got to impose our own mindset on for two games. Without player input, they're a soggy brick, nothing more. So having a game where that crucial ability to input the player's attitude is removed/substantially lessened, Bioware gave us a painfully bland character with nothing going for them. They turned Shepard from an idealised image in the player's head to the most uninteresting protagonist on the planet.
#8
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 12:06
NRieh
-
- Members
- 2 923 messages
ACTIONS - probably, but NEVER - thoughts, feelings, emotions. Most of the times (I'm not saying "always" , there was a Horizon scene, after all..) player had an optin to express this or that, sometimes more - sometimes - less, ME2 introduced interrupts, which added actions to words.I think this whole concept is really a fallacy as Shepards story, overall actions, and trajectory was always predetermined, even in ME1.
In ME2 we had Zaeed. Which was "click me" style, the awful thing, but hey, he was a part of free DLC.... Having in ME3 SAME style "conversations", which included YOUR single replics with your friends and LI (yes, I remember "calibrations", but Garrus at least turned and looked at you)? Having renegade Sheps QQing over Thessia and having them shared with paragons kiddish nightmares? Really?
PS: and "overall actions" are predetermined even in table live RPGs, by GM and setting.
Modifié par Nrieh, 03 juin 2012 - 12:12 .
#9
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 04:45
Disgruntled Shepard
-
- Members
- 18 messages
ME1 & 2 are far more replayabe becuase you are playing in dialogues, in ME3 you are mostly just watching.
I tried to replay the game despite the ending, but it became boring very quickly becuase I knew exactly what was going to be said in every conversation, granted in ME1 & 2 the core of the conversation didn't change that much by chsing different responses but at least you got to explore different versions of it every time.
I tried to replay the game despite the ending, but it became boring very quickly becuase I knew exactly what was going to be said in every conversation, granted in ME1 & 2 the core of the conversation didn't change that much by chsing different responses but at least you got to explore different versions of it every time.
#10
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 04:59
spirosz
-
- Members
- 16 356 messages
Nrieh wrote...
ACTIONS - probably, but NEVER - thoughts, feelings, emotions. Most of the times (I'm not saying "always" , there was a Horizon scene, after all..) player had an optin to express this or that, sometimes more - sometimes - less, ME2 introduced interrupts, which added actions to words.I think this whole concept is really a fallacy as Shepards story, overall actions, and trajectory was always predetermined, even in ME1.
In ME2 we had Zaeed. Which was "click me" style, the awful thing, but hey, he was a part of free DLC.... Having in ME3 SAME style "conversations", which included YOUR single replics with your friends and LI (yes, I remember "calibrations", but Garrus at least turned and looked at you)? Having renegade Sheps QQing over Thessia and having them shared with paragons kiddish nightmares? Really?
PS: and "overall actions" are predetermined even in table live RPGs, by GM and setting.
Basically this. We understand that there were certain things that are pre-deterimined - whenever the council lives or dies/ VS situation, etc, but it's the way we were allowed to approach them, which is key. We were allowed to influence the flow of conversations and "establish" a personality, that we, the gamers, thought portrayed what we wanted.
As I wrote in another topic - I believe ME2 had the best dialogue system. It added the auto-dialogue to take away the conversation that would lead to Shepard saying the same thing (meeting Thane for first time), but left enough in for the player to interact with that made it none noticiable for most, at least that's the way I see it.
Modifié par spiros9110, 03 juin 2012 - 04:59 .
#11
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 05:08
BatmanPWNS
-
- Members
- 6 392 messages
Yes because clearly Shepard had been full of 70% autodialogue for 3 game now.........oh wait!
#12
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 05:11
chemiclord
-
- Members
- 2 499 messages
Fans didn't WANT to see it, so they didn't.
But yes, it was NEVER "your" Shepard. It was NEVER "your" story, no matter how well Bioware fooled you into thinking it was for 2 and 9/10ths of a game.
But yes, it was NEVER "your" Shepard. It was NEVER "your" story, no matter how well Bioware fooled you into thinking it was for 2 and 9/10ths of a game.
#13
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 05:12
sackyhack
-
- Members
- 623 messages
I don't think anybody's asking for a complete blank slate in Shepard, as he was already somewhat established in ME1 and 2. It's just that COMPARED to ME1 and ME2, ME3 had less dialogue choices, and a lot of people including me miss the spiderweb of conversations. Some of the streamlining is better, like removing the middleman for when crewmates run out of things to say and go into a loop. But some of the autodialogue was excessive when compared to previous entries, turning what was once an interactive element in the last two games into cutscenes you just sit back and watch.
#14
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 05:19
wright1978
-
- Members
- 8 116 messages
I got to control what he said in 1st 2 games. Then in the 3rd he said things that completely contradicted the choices i had made in the 1st 2 games in huge rolling stretches of auto-dialogue. Yes sure i accept i didn't have an open world control over making up whatever story i wished but he was my character to charactertise through dialogue choice.
#15
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 05:23
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
Guest_Cthulhu42_*
-
- Guests
ME1 had its fair share of awful "all these dialogue options are the same" situations, but I felt that for the most part ME2 got it right.
#16
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 05:30
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
Guest_Catch This Fade_*
-
- Guests
I've been saying this for a while, Shepard was never "ours".
#17
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 05:37
Ryzaki
-
- Members
- 34 427 messages
Well I had several different Shepards. ME3 made them a homogeneous blob. So no all that autodialogue wasn't an improvement.
I blame all those who went "oooh look at LOTSB and all that autodialogue banter with Liara! Shep's actually a character now!" Thanks jerkoffs.
I blame all those who went "oooh look at LOTSB and all that autodialogue banter with Liara! Shep's actually a character now!" Thanks jerkoffs.
#18
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 05:56
SlottsMachine
-
- Members
- 5 549 messages
Ryzaki wrote...
Well I had several different Shepards. ME3 made them a homogeneous blob. So no all that autodialogue wasn't an improvement.
I blame all those who went "oooh look at LOTSB and all that autodialogue banter with Liara! Shep's actually a character now!" Thanks jerkoffs.
YES! I thought I was the only one. And it didn't help that a lot of that crowd was acting like LotSB was the holy grail of story telling or something.
Modifié par GeneralSlotts193, 03 juin 2012 - 06:02 .
#19
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 06:16
abaris
-
- Members
- 1 860 messages
Disgruntled Shepard wrote...
ME1 & 2 are far more replayabe becuase you are playing in dialogues, in ME3 you are mostly just watching.
Or spamming the spacebar once you've watched it once, since there's nothing new to discover.
#20
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 06:27
wright1978
-
- Members
- 8 116 messages
abaris wrote...
Disgruntled Shepard wrote...
ME1 & 2 are far more replayabe becuase you are playing in dialogues, in ME3 you are mostly just watching.
Or spamming the spacebar once you've watched it once, since there's nothing new to discover.
I never once did that. It would be like fast forwarded through my favourite film or skipping a chapter while re-reading a book. Now in ME3 it got so bad i could have left the room firm in the knowledge i could be gone for 10 minutes and shep wouldn't give me a dialogue choice.
Modifié par wright1978, 03 juin 2012 - 06:28 .
#21
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 06:57
slimgrin
-
- Members
- 12 486 messages
chemiclord wrote...
Fans didn't WANT to see it, so they didn't.
But yes, it was NEVER "your" Shepard. It was NEVER "your" story, no matter how well Bioware fooled you into thinking it was for 2 and 9/10ths of a game.
As for being 'my' Shepard, well she's always been more Bioware's than mine, that's no revelation. Shepard is not a blank slate character. That didn't stop Bioware from insisting she was mine though, time and again. Maybe you missed that part of the ad campaign. I had hoped for Bioware to up their game a bit in the C&C department, which they never did. It's mostly about the illusion of choice with them. But to say ME3 wasn't a step down is the same lame argument apologists have been making about Mass Effect from the beginning: Mass Effect never had 'A' or "B' so quit asking for it. Not only is this not true ( there are elements that have been whittled away), there's no reason fans can't hold Bioware acountable when they do something lousy, like the fetch quests and black and white consequences in ME3.
Modifié par slimgrin, 03 juin 2012 - 07:04 .
#22
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 06:57
NRieh
-
- Members
- 2 923 messages
it was NEVER "your" Shepard. It was NEVER "your" story, no matter how well Bioware fooled you into thinking it was for 2 and 9/10ths of a game.
Well, it was YOUR choice to consider YOUR Shep something totally premade and non-personal..I've been saying this for a while, Shepard was never "ours".
Once again, fact that all Sheps fight Saren does not make them same, not even within same "aligment". Emotions, backgrounds, motives, feelings etc - it all was player's own (for those who needed it, of course, those who did not - just enjoyed their "yet-another-hero". And you can't say it's all about selling things and PR, there is no way you can prove it to those who did have their "own" Shep.
ps: You may count youself how many combinations may follow from, let's say, 3 dialogues with 3 primary and 3 optional answers each.
#23
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 07:01
Il Divo
-
- Members
- 9 789 messages
It is possible for someone to accept that Shepard is not "theirs" but to hate autodialogue with a burning passion. I prefer feeling like a participant in conversations, rather than occasionally directing the flow. ME1 did this, ME2 (mostly) did this. There are many instances in ME3 which are perfect prompts for player participation, but simply were not used.
Edit: It's the same basic argument behind why the lack of neutral dialogue sucks. Sure, I never had full control over my character, but it doesn't mean I want less.
Edit: It's the same basic argument behind why the lack of neutral dialogue sucks. Sure, I never had full control over my character, but it doesn't mean I want less.
Modifié par Il Divo, 03 juin 2012 - 07:04 .
#24
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 07:02
NRieh
-
- Members
- 2 923 messages
LotSB has autodialogues? Oh my, I was just going to finally get one..probably, will still do.... But anyway. Wah may do for a DLC must never be main-game standart, imo.YES! I thought I was the only one. And it didn't help that a lot of that crowd was acting like LotSB was the holy grail of story telling or something.
#25
Posté 03 juin 2012 - 07:12
Ryzaki
-
- Members
- 34 427 messages
GeneralSlotts193 wrote...
Ryzaki wrote...
Well I had several different Shepards. ME3 made them a homogeneous blob. So no all that autodialogue wasn't an improvement.
I blame all those who went "oooh look at LOTSB and all that autodialogue banter with Liara! Shep's actually a character now!" Thanks jerkoffs.
YES! I thought I was the only one. And it didn't help that a lot of that crowd was acting like LotSB was the holy grail of story telling or something.
Agreed.
And I miss neutral dialogue. It was good for when I didn't want my Shep to sound like a boyscout or a psycho. Which was most of the damn time.
