288 réponses à ce sujet

[Mastone]

Biotic Sage wrote...

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.

I agree with Vox Draco on ME2 not being that interesting and is seriously lacking in the storytelling category, I think the same of ME3, ME 1 still is king.
With regards to not planning a story I think you ( Biotic Sage)are wrong;
Lucas didn't plan ( or somewhat plan) his story so it sucked, JK Rowling planned hers and whattayaknow the story was good, Tolkien planned LOTR 1 to 3 ( in the main lines) and whattayaknow..it was good.
Saying not having some form of planning when telling a story is a good thing sounds ridiculous to me, sure leave stuff open to develop itself, but make sure you have a solid framework to work on( and stick to it)
Also setting your priorities straight is important too, focus on storytelling ...or multiplayer, focus on RPG elements and gameplay or on polishing graphics, streamlining action elements,  focus on ME2+3....or invest in KOTOR online etc etc.
Bioware failed on most accounts and I hope they are licking their wounds and come back humble and not with the same disdain for their customers as they have done recently

[Dean_the_Young]

Eain wrote...


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.

Ironically enough, your very opening quote establishes more.

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.

Bioware's writing teams are seasoned authors.

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.

Correction: the story required a MacGuffin plot device to be resolved... just like ME1 and ME2 did. The Crucible is not a deus ex machina, because it is firmly established early and continuously throughout the game.

There certainly is no obligation that a Macguffin NOT be used, because there was never any obligation that a conventional victory be viable.

The story's events overtook them and it became the author of its writers rather than vice versa.

That's pretty common regardless: you can find a lot of authors and writers who find themselves tunneled into ways they didn't intend to do because prior-written aspects increasingly locked them in.

[Dean_the_Young]

yukon fire wrote...

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.

There are plenty of other reasons for that: time and resources, which were already scrunched by the end.

[yukon fire]

satunnainen wrote...

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.

Leave Skyrim out of this, all of us are here because some people actually put a lot of effort and time to craft it just right ala Dawnbreaker, and some people forgot that they actually already showed us exactly what happens when a Relay explodes, and didn't care.  

[TookYoCookies]

" there’s really no way plan out the details of the story for Mass Effect 3."

Jesus f*cking Christ, Maybe play the first 2 games of the trilogy?? I mean shot in the dark.. Just epic Mac Walters fail, doesnt know how to end it... "Umm sh*t, insert Deus Ex Machina here, and martyr the Protagonist. Yeah that will work... Oh yea, and the relays get destroyed and the Galaxy is now a f*cking wasteland! Hazaah! this has never been done before....".

It was so simple... Just let the player fight the Reapers, let the depth of the narrative play out subliminally while focusing on the near-impossible task at hand... What took place in ME3 was not artistic vision, it was writers block paired with time constraints on top of a misguided understanding of what made Mass Effect appeal to players.

[Femlob]

I'd love to call the man a talentless hack, but the truth is that he's a good character writer.

And that's what he should've stuck to.

[yukon fire]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

yukon fire wrote...

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.

There are plenty of other reasons for that: time and resources, which were already scrunched by the end.

Its so easy to lose track of time when you don't have a clue in your head what your doing.

[Eain]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Bioware's writing teams are seasoned authors.

No they're not, and Walters is the least of them. Prior to the ME series he wrote a thing for Jade Empire. Big whoop. He went from nobody to lead writer over the course of a single title. Weekes and Dombrow have more credentials, but they're not exactly the Robert Jordans and George RR Martins of the world.

Still, they are by far the more talented writers of the team, and this is evident in the Rannoch and Tuchanka archs. In fact, everything about those questlines indicates that they in fact DID plan ahead, thus debunking Walters' claim that not planning ahead is really the only way to make a game like this.

Also not having the DEM discussion again. The Crucible is a DEM and that's a fact, and the only people who would argue the opposite are people who do not understand what a DEM is. Calling it a MacGuffin changes nothing, it's both.

Modifié par Eain, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:12 .

[Dean_the_Young]

yukon fire wrote...

satunnainen wrote...

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.

Leave Skyrim out of this, all of us are here because some people actually put a lot of effort and time to craft it just right ala Dawnbreaker, and some people forgot that they actually already showed us exactly what happens when a Relay explodes, and didn't care.  

And some people don't understand the nature of the difference between explosions and controlled energy outbursts.

[Dean_the_Young]

Eain wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Bioware's writing teams are seasoned authors.

No they're not, and Walters is the least of them. Prior to the ME series he wrote a thing for Jade Empire. Big whoop. He went from nobody to lead writer over the course of a single title. Weekes and Dombrow have more credentials, but they're not exactly the Robert Jordans and George RR Martins of the world.

Besides that Walters has the other parts of the ME series under his belt, and hardly took over over the course of a single title? You don't need to be the Robert Jordans and George RR Martins of the world to be seasoned writers, or part of a seasoned team.

Still, they are by far the more talented writers of the team, and this is evident in the Rannoch and Tuchanka archs. In fact, everything about those questlines indicates that they in fact DID plan ahead,

*Citation needed

thus debunking Walters' claim that not planning ahead is really the only way to make a game like this.

That's not his argument. That's your strawman. Stop making more of a fool of yourself and drop your petty bias. It's feeding into your hyperbole and outright mistakes in your arguments.

Modifié par Dean_the_Young, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:16 .

[Jenonax]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

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.

I've never read this article before so I've missed this particular delightful quote.

No of course its not a rare writing strategy.  Its perfectly fine when one is writing a first draft or having a creative free for all when embarking on a new project.  Thats how ideas grow and develop.  Thats where inspiration comes from.  But at some point the author has to get serious and reign his artistic vision in in order to create a structured narrative.  

Writing is a fine balance between creative freedom and absolute control.  You have to be in control of your story otherwise it gets away from you and suddenly its full of contradictions and plot holes.  

This is especially true when you have branching storylines you cannot afford to be creative especially when it comes to the conclusion.  The end is the time for control. 

[yukon fire]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

yukon fire wrote...

satunnainen wrote...

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.

Leave Skyrim out of this, all of us are here because some people actually put a lot of effort and time to craft it just right ala Dawnbreaker, and some people forgot that they actually already showed us exactly what happens when a Relay explodes, and didn't care.  

And some people don't understand the nature of the difference between explosions and controlled energy outbursts.

Yes, because torching galactic civilization and leaving everyone to suffer/starve is sooo much better than just outright ending everyone/thing, what with the colors and all. I guess "Okeer couldn't impart connection"  

Modifié par yukon fire, 08 juillet 2012 - 11:20 .

[Lucky Mame]

So.. Now anyone afraid for Dragon Age 3? If BioWare's DA team is following the same strategy then do you think it's going to end up the same way ME3 did?

[Eain]

Dean_the_Young wrote...
Besides that Walters has the other parts of the ME series under his belt, and hardly took over over the course of a single title? You don't need to be the Robert Jordans and George RR Martins of the world to be seasoned writers, or part of a seasoned team.

They spent eight years cooking up this trilogy. Eight years. If something of this complexity requires eight years to make then you've done a poor job, that's all I can say. Beyond that, they HAVE NO CREDENTIALS. Just look them up at IMDB and see what they've done:

Chris Hepler http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1639976/
John Dombrow http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1260469/
Patrick Weekes http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2860227/
Mac Walters http://www.imdb.com/name/nm1906038/

None of them have done more than four projects over the course of a full decade. That's not being a seasoned writer, that's just being someone who likes to write every now and again. Look, I heartily encourage anyone who wants to write to do so, and for what it's worth I think Dombrow and Weekes actually did really well, but they are not seasoned, they are not veterans, their credentials are almost nonexistant. Bioware employs C-grade writers and is sometimes fortunate enough to find that they have talent, and in other cases they end up with people who do not. Karpyshyn had more writing experience than all these guys combined and he left Bioware.

*Citation needed

No citation needed at all, it's just speculation on my part and can go unsourced. Still, I think it holds up to scrutiny.

[Vox Draco]

[quote]Dean_the_Young wrote...
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.[/quote]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.

[/quote]

I partly disagree with ME2. Taking again Star Wars as an example: A new hope can be easily viewed on its own, much like Mass Effect1. Then Empire was released, and it is truly the best part of the entire series because it did many things different, but kept a focus on the conflict established in the first movie and also stayed true to the cast and focused more on them, including the main villain.

ME2 however, as much praise it gets (mostly for Miranda's arse I suspect though) it is mostly a mess in regards to ME1. Too many new characters are introduced that makes it hard to really care for all of them, instead of going more into the already established characters. And the conflict against the Reapers seems to take a severe step back. I always had the impression I am wasting my time somewhat, that Shepard should start to rally the galaxy NOW and not on part 3 when all is too late.

ME2 just feels like a filler, like the devs and writers didn't really have an idea where to go exactly

[yukon fire]

Lucky Mame wrote...

So.. Now anyone afraid for Dragon Age 3? If BioWare's DA team is following the same strategy then do you think it's going to end up the same way ME3 did?

It will no doubt be written on a bar napkin 3 weeks before going "gold", and it will just say "Mages vs Templars".

[Dean_the_Young]

Jenonax wrote...


No of course its not a rare writing strategy.  Its perfectly fine when one is writing a first draft or having a creative free for all when embarking on a new project.  Thats how ideas grow and develop.  Thats where inspiration comes from.  But at some point the author has to get serious and reign his artistic vision in in order to create a structured narrative. 

Agreed.

Writing is a fine balance between creative freedom and absolute control.  You have to be in control of your story otherwise it gets away from you and suddenly its full of contradictions and plot holes. 

Agreed again.

This is especially true when you have branching storylines you cannot afford to be creative especially when it comes to the conclusion.

While I agree in principal, you can also make the counter-argument that a branching narrative requires the most freedom of all, and even more when you allow undefined aspects within which can cause more variances when decided.

 The end is the time for control.

This I disagree with. Or rather, the end for the trilogy was Mass Effect 3, and trying then didn't work. I'd argue that the end is the time for control, but the middle is the time for planning.


ME1 was a stepping stone into the trilogy, but as a self-contained story it wasn't an effective lead-in: heck, the trilogy could have dumped Shepard for a new hero each game and the story would work just as well. ME1 ended with no clear next step, no means to beat the Reapers (if we even needed to, with them 'trapped in Dark Space'), and no clear next move by either us or the Reapers. Where the Mass Effect trilogy was really going to set its path and tone was in Mass Effect 2. Mass Effect 3 was always going to have to deal with the hand and planning of its predecessor.

The big issue with the Mass Effect trilogy, as I see it, is that it didn't go with branching storylines. It made as if it would in ME1, but ME2 put too much control in bringing everything back to a single narrative (the irrelevance of the Council, Councilor decision) without corresponding that with planning then and there, both for ME2 and ME3. They cut the branching storylines (applying control) without planning how the one they did settle on would go.

[v TricKy v]

Well that doesnt suprise me one bit. There are far to many inconsistencies in the Story to be otherwise. Really a shame to be honest.
Lets just all hope that Dragon Age 3 will be better

[satunnainen]

Eain wrote...

They spent eight years cooking up this trilogy. Eight years. If something of this complexity requires eight years to make then you've done a poor job, that's all I can say. Beyond that, they HAVE NO CREDENTIALS. Just look them up at IMDB and see what they've done:

Who else has done something of this complexity then since you can say that 8 years is too much? Also imdb shows only finished projects of certain areas (tv, film, games, something else?). For example nothing I have done during my 20+ years of working shows in the imdb. Still plenty of people are happy that I did those things.

[Jenonax]

Dean_the_Young wrote...


]While I agree in principal, you can also make the counter-argument that a branching narrative requires the most freedom of all, and even more when you allow undefined aspects within which can cause more variances when decided.

I agree that when coming up with the branching storyline that requires real flare and creativity, but the exectution has to be exceptionally controlled and more than a bit clever as to not contradict each other and make each and everyone of them logical and satisfying.

]This I disagree with. Or rather, the end for the trilogy was Mass Effect 3, and trying then didn't work. I'd argue that the end is the time for control, but the middle is the time for planning.

Agree to a point.  Really if the beginning and the middle are well put together the ending should really just write itself.

ME1 was a stepping stone into the trilogy, but as a self-contained story it wasn't an effective lead-in: heck, the trilogy could have dumped Shepard for a new hero each game and the story would work just as well. ME1 ended with no clear next step, no means to beat the Reapers (if we even needed to, with them 'trapped in Dark Space'), and no clear next move by either us or the Reapers. Where the Mass Effect trilogy was really going to set its path and tone was in Mass Effect 2. Mass Effect 3 was always going to have to deal with the hand and planning of its predecessor.

I could write essays about what a poorly put together trilogy Mass Effect is so I do agree with you here.  However I disagree with ME1 being the main problem. IMO its ME2 that really goes off on a tangent as it was all ultimately pointless and thus there is very little development of the storyline set down by ME1.

The big issue with the Mass Effect trilogy, as I see it, is that it didn't go with branching storylines. It made as if it would in ME1, but ME2 put too much control in bringing everything back to a single narrative (the irrelevance of the Council, Councilor decision) without corresponding that with planning then and there, both for ME2 and ME3. They cut the branching storylines (applying control) without planning how the one they did settle on would go.

Could not agree with you more. 

[FedericoV]

Are you really surprised? 90% of serial fiction is written like that, for multiple reasons. That's why most endings suck badly.

[yukon fire]

satunnainen wrote...

Eain wrote...

They spent eight years cooking up this trilogy. Eight years. If something of this complexity requires eight years to make then you've done a poor job, that's all I can say. Beyond that, they HAVE NO CREDENTIALS. Just look them up at IMDB and see what they've done:

Who else has done something of this complexity then since you can say that 8 years is too much? Also imdb shows only finished projects of certain areas (tv, film, games, something else?). For example nothing I have done during my 20+ years of working shows in the imdb. Still plenty of people are happy that I did those things.

One would have hoped that after 8 years they would have learned about the subject matter and created something that fit the story, not be forced to shoehorn some god machine space magic because you ran out of both time and ideas. It oddly similar to the council races failing to prepare for the reapers, poor planing and hubris killed billions and maybe even ME3 itself. 

[Dean_the_Young]

Eain wrote...

IMDB stuff

Already been handled better by another poster.

*Citation needed

No citation needed at all, it's just speculation on my part and can go unsourced. Still, I think it holds up to scrutiny.

Scrutiny has just revealed it to be something you're making up because it feels right. Truthiness is not a valid argument.

[SpamBot2000]

I think ME3 would have turned out a lot better if they had done what he's talking about there, what with the figuring out the consequences of player actions in previous parts of the trilogy and such.