288 réponses à ce sujet

[Eain]

http://business.fina...-all-audiences/

DK: How much of the story was sketched out from the beginning and how much was written after the completion of the other games?

MW: I think people would be sort of surprised by how little we defined in the upcoming games. So in Mass Effect 1, it was really only a couple of paragraphs about what we thought Mass Effect 2 would be and even less of what we thought Mass Effect 3 would be. And it was the same thing when we where doing 2. It was really about having stakes in the ground about certain things. We knew that Mass Effect 3 would be about, the Reapers returning. We knew that it would be about the galactic conflict that would ensue from that, and we knew that it  would be the end of Shepard’s story, one way or the other.

And other than those sort of key stakes, we didn’t tie ourselves into something, which is good, because it allowed us to do whatever we  wanted as long as we weren’t veering away too much from [those key stakes].

And do whatever he wanted, Walters did.

Then he goes on

In three we had the lore pushing us from behind and the looming conflict pull us forward, but most of the details from Mass Effect 3 were developed post-Mass Effect 2. Like 99.5% of them. We hashed it and and figured it out.

And that’s really the only way you can do it because, going back to the concept of all the choices the player could have made in Mass Effect 1 and 2, until we can see what all of those possibilities are, there’s really no way plan out the details of the story for Mass Effect 3.

I like how he says that the only way you can do a story like this is by not planning ahead.

I think a few professional authors would beg to differ.

Modifié par Eain, 08 juillet 2012 - 10:23 .

[KiwiQuiche]

+100 rivalry.


Seriously, though? Good god, Mac. Also, you did forget a crapton of Mass Effect lore in 3, silly man. :|

Modifié par KiwiQuiche, 08 juillet 2012 - 10:26 .

[Jenonax]

Why on Earth would he admit this? Does he not realise how incompetent it makes him seem?

[Biotic Sage]

Not planning a story completely out ahead of time is not in and of itself a bad thing. Plenty of professional writers "go where the story takes them." Outlining the entire skeleton of a narrative isn't the ONLY way to tell stories, and many of my favorite writers don't do it that way. The key thing here though is to build upon the already established narrative. As long as a writer builds upon and stays consistent with the established narrative in previous intallments, or even within the same text, then that is a perfectly legitimate storytelling process.

[DocGriffin]

"And that’s really the only way you can do it".... What!?

Except, ya know, planning how the current game fits into the next ahead of time, or developing the next one before the release of the current, like pretty much every movie and video game studio ever.

[Mastone]

People like this are full of themselves, they don't think they can fail or say something stupid..until they see the pavement closing in on them when they fall....and afterward blame someone else.
I wish someone was in charge who did actually believe in some form of planning or trying to work out how to incorporate a lot of different variables into endgame content, maybe ME2+3 didn't suck as bad as they did.

[Vox Draco]

That's not surprising at all. I am not a professional writer, but I doubt that you have a full story in your mind that long from the start. A story often grows as you tell it, things that seemed logical at first become less logical when they are written and spoken by the characters and so forth...but that only counts for details.

The initial conflict and how it should be solved? That should have been there all along...

But the best proof it was never planned in detail how the trilogy would go is simply Mass Effect 2...a mostly pointless plot that didn't push the story arc that much forward, introduced a somewhat new enemy and tons of new characters I hardly cared for...

Its like Star Wars. Lucas always claimed he had the full story in his mind for 9 movies, but I doubt it was fleshed out in his head. I think the version of the prequels he had thirty years ago might have been way better because it probably didn't focus too much on tiny kids and selling toys to them, but I enter the realm of speculation, it is dark and evil here, I should go

[Biotic Sage]

Vox Draco wrote...

That's not surprising at all. I am not a professional writer, but I doubt that you have a full story in your mind that long from the start. A story often grows as you tell it, things that seemed logical at first become less logical when they are written and spoken by the characters and so forth...but that only counts for details.

The initial conflict and how it should be solved? That should have been there all along...

But the best proof it was never planned in detail how the trilogy would go is simply Mass Effect 2...a mostly pointless plot that didn't push the story arc that much forward, introduced a somewhat new enemy and tons of new characters I hardly cared for...

Its like Star Wars. Lucas always claimed he had the full story in his mind for 9 movies, but I doubt it was fleshed out in his head. I think the version of the prequels he had thirty years ago might have been way better because it probably didn't focus too much on tiny kids and selling toys to them, but I enter the realm of speculation, it is dark and evil here, I should go

Very much agree, I think you were writing your post at the same time I was writing mine.  The OP is trying to point to this interview as a disgusting skeleton in Bioware's closet or smear on their credibility, whereas I just see it as, "Yeah, it makes sense they focused in on one installment at a time."  I doubt very much that anybody who has written a multiple installment series had it entirely planned out from the start.

[varcety]

I'm sorry, Mac Walters, but your art has no integrity.

[Cypher_CS]

Eain wrote...

In three we had the lore pushing us from behind and the looming conflict pull us forward, but most of the details from Mass Effect 3 were developed post-Mass Effect 2. Like 99.5% of them. We hashed it and and figured it out.

And that’s really the only way you can do it because, going back to the concept of all the choices the player could have made in Mass Effect 1 and 2, until we can see what all of those possibilities are, there’s really no way plan out the details of the story for Mass Effect 3.

I like how he says that the only way you can do a story like this is by not planning ahead.

I think a few professional authors would beg to differ.

Err... 
That's not what he said...

He said that the only way you can do a story like the one where the previous two stories had massive branching choices for the players to take and then understand that feedback and choices made and only then go about exploring the major themes, the major choices.

Professional authors don't do multiple choice storyarchs....

But way to spin.

[The Angry One]

Eain wrote...
I like how he says that the only way you can do a story like this is by not planning ahead.

I think a few professional authors would beg to differ.

You can see where the Catalyst gets it's tunnel-vision from.
"It's the only way! The only solution!"

Cypher_CS wrote...

Err... 
That's not what he said...

He
said that the only way you can do a story like the one where the
previous two stories had massive branching choices for the players to
take and then understand that feedback and choices made and only then go
about exploring the major themes, the major choices.

Professional authors don't do multiple choice storyarchs....

But way to spin.

And yet Karpyshyn could draw up the dark energy outline during ME2 all the same.
Not to mention all the times Walters flat out disregarded player choice anyway. Anderson, anyone? Rachnii?

Modifié par The Angry One, 08 juillet 2012 - 10:40 .

[Dean_the_Young]

Jenonax wrote...

Why on Earth would he admit this? Does he not realise how incompetent it makes him seem?

One, it's been known for awhile. Two, it's hardly a novel or rare writing strategy. Three, it's not even a singular responsibility or design choice.

[Persephone]

The Angry One wrote...

And yet Karpyshyn could draw up the dark energy outline during ME2 all the same.
Not to mention all the times Walters flat out disregarded player choice anyway. Anderson, anyone? Rachnii?

Anderson not being councilor isn't a disregarded choice. Agreed re: The Rachni though.

[Pantegana]

The Angry One wrote...

"It's the only way! The only solution!"

Starchild listens to Kreator

[Cypher_CS]

The Angry One wrote...


And yet Karpyshyn could draw up the dark energy outline during ME2 all the same.
Not to mention all the times Walters flat out disregarded player choice anyway. Anderson, anyone? Rachnii?

Oh really?
And I'm assuming you've read this... presumably 10 page long outline of the Dark Energy plot by Karpyshyn?
You've obviously also made comments on it and sent it all back to Drew for further development, right?

Come on, an outline can just be several paragraphs. Doesn't need to be anymore.
Definitely not a contradiction of what Walters said.

Also - many authors don't plan ahead, mind you.

[Reorte]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Very much agree, I think you were writing your post at the same time I was writing mine.  The OP is trying to point to this interview as a disgusting skeleton in Bioware's closet or smear on their credibility, whereas I just see it as, "Yeah, it makes sense they focused in on one installment at a time."  I doubt very much that anybody who has written a multiple installment series had it entirely planned out from the start.

There's a large gap between having everything planned and making it up as you go along and this interview makes it look like it's almost entirely the latter. There really should've been a good sketch for the main plot from the start, what the Reapers are, how they'll invade, how they could be defeated. Details might (and almost certainly will) change throughout development but there's no sign of even a framework being in place.

[yukon fire]

What a lemming, he'd jump off a cliff just to get to his starbrat.

Modifié par yukon fire, 08 juillet 2012 - 10:51 .

[Sarevok Synder]

Well it was always pretty obvious that Starbrat was a last minute ass pull. I mean seriously. was there ever any doubt?

[Vox Draco]

Biotic Sage wrote...

Very much agree, I think you were writing your post at the same time I was writing mine.  The OP is trying to point to this interview as a disgusting skeleton in Bioware's closet or smear on their credibility, whereas I just see it as, "Yeah, it makes sense they focused in on one installment at a time."  I doubt very much that anybody who has written a multiple installment series had it entirely planned out from the start.

*laughs* yes, just read your comment further up.

But even though I have no problem with Bioware evolving their story with every new game, I have a problem with the story past ME1 not feeling as if it evolved naturally.

Even though I can tell a story as I write it down and see where it goes, I should at least have some key points to focus on. If I introduce a threat like the Reapers, I should have an idea why they are there, what they want, and how and if they are stoppable.

The events in ME1 and how they are told usare very different to the last moments of ME3. The endings never feel like they are born from the story as a necessity. I mean, plotpoints like the Geth/Quarian peace even contradict the entire logic of Starkid, and that really makes me wonder if the writers knew what they were doing at times.

The trilogy just doesn't feel consistent with itself, very much like, again, the Star Wars prequels. There, for example that Count Dooku(la) is introduced as an important villain in part 2, just to have him killed of right at the start of part 3 and introduce yet another major villain (General Grievous).  All three movies hardly feel like belonging together, but more like a mix-match of elements and half-hearted attempts to be original, please the fans and sell toys...

[Eain]

Let me requote:

In three we had the lore pushing us from behind and the looming conflict pull us forward, but most of the details from Mass Effect 3 were developed post-Mass Effect 2. Like 99.5% of them. We hashed it and and figured it out.

99.5% is a lot.

Let me put this into perspective. All that the writers supposedly knew about the game was this: here be Reapers.

That's it.

We could've told them that. Look, making things up as you go along is fine if you're a seasoned author who knows how to keep the story from spinning out of control. It evidently did not work for Walters and his team, as the story did spin out of control and required a DEM plot device to be resolved. The story's events overtook them and it became the author of its writers rather than vice versa.

[Those Protheans]

>Doesn't plan ahead

>Wonders why the story turned to s**t

[Applepie_Svk]

‘We’ve wanted our games to be inclusive for everyone’
achieved now is supposed VOCAL MINORITY still piseed off ....

[Dean_the_Young]

DocGriffin wrote...

"And that’s really the only way you can do it".... What!?

That's not quite what he's saying: he's saying that's the only way you can do it in the scope of how they approached the series, which is true. The more open you leave the planning of future games, the less you can pre-plan of the subsequent. It's inherent in the design strategy, but that's not an inherently bad design strategy.

If you use a different strategy, you can do a different way. But they already had their overarching design.

Except, ya know, planning how the current game fits into the next ahead of time, or developing the next one before the release of the current, like pretty much every movie and video game studio ever.

You'd be amazed how many don't. The original Star Wars is an excellent example, but you can find legions of great series which had far less pre-planning than most realize.

Mass Effect also had to deal with the reality that it could well have been a one-shot game, not a trilogy. Mass Effect 1 wasn't even called Mass Effect 1, after all: it was simply Mass Effect. It was an experiment on a number of grounds that left usual Bioware styles, and hardly a shoe-in for a success, or a sequel. If it had flopped, and there's plenty of basis for why it could (gameplay, inventory, etc.), that would have been it for the series. With that in mind, not writing an entire trilogy out when you aren't even sure if the first one will pass is pretty understandable, and usual.


And it's not like locking yourself in a single outline style is necessarily a good thing either: Mass Effect 2 is arguably the most lauded game in the series, but that was in large part because it stepped out of ME1's shadow and took a different style. It could only do that by listening to feedback from ME1 and incorporating that into its design, such as the incredible emphasis on characters, which isn't something that can be known beforehand.

Pre-planning comes with a cost: the more strictly you pre-plan, the less you can do to incorporate feedback or adjust to your received strengths and weaknesses. Garrus of ME1 was planned to be the bromance buddy that he turned into in ME2 and ME3: the ME1 character arc was pretty much Garrus becoming his own person under Shepard's mentorship and preparing to leave. Tali certainly wasn't being prepared as a fan-favorite romance option. These are just two of the things that were incredibly well received by much of the fanbase that were not and could not be pre-planned from the start, because they were extended and reworked as a response.





Don't get me wrong: Bioware certainly did underplan. But that's an issue of extent, not nature: don't act like this is some bizaar moronic concept, and don't forget that it's an approach with weaknesses AND strengths.

[yukon fire]

It explains why so many people had to get email/twitter/"got left on the Citadel" killed, they forgot about them so the just went on a Mass Murdering streak.

[satunnainen]

So many experts of multi part - rpg game storyline continuity writing in this thread alone. Maybe bioware should start hiring these experts from their own forums. How fortunate that they all spend time here, instead of for example skyrim forums.