288 réponses à ce sujet

[Zuka999]

77boy84 wrote...

Zuka999 wrote...

77boy84 wrote...

Zuka999 wrote...

I mean, look, hate on the story all you want but when you start calling into question how people do their jobs you really cross the line. The BioWare writers have no obligations to any of you, its certainly not in their job description that they have to interact with the public in any way. How they go about writing the story is up to them, and it works differently for different writers. Unless you are actually involved in the writing process your opinion is invalid when it comes to criticizing their work ethics.

The issue with the writing for Mass Effect was more likely because they switched lead writers mid-way through the series than it was that they lacked some sort of comprehensive outline for the trilogy. A writer like George R.R. Martin uses absolutely no outlines and he pulls HUNDREDS of story threads together seamlessly - on the fly! And everyone absolutely loves it! A writer who has spent a lot of time coming up with ideas for a series knows what they want to do and when they want to do it.

Drew Karpyshyn likely had a vision of what the trilogy would be and that was lost when he left.

I hate the obligation arguement so much. Are they TECHNICALLY obligated to do a decent job and actually give a rat's ass about the game? No, they're not, but they should FEEL an obligation to it if they want people to shell out money for their work.

I can call in question how they do their job, because I paid sixty dollars, and ME3 sure as heck wasn't worth that. If you pay someone to do something, and they do a poor job, you can call them out on it and criticise how they do their job. It's okay to do that because they are being PAID to do it.

If someone does work for a job, and the work is substandard, they will be criticised for it. There is absoloutely no reason why anyone should be immune to criticism when they're working professionally.

You have the right not to pay them anymore, not the right to decide the company's internal politics. They're still not obligated to you at all.

Yes, I have the right to not pay them, and I also have the right to criticise them if I don't agree with how they do something.

I suppose Bioware isn't obligated to anyone, but it really does bum me out that you think it's okay that they don't feel an obligation to do their best and work hard to deliver great products instead of mediocre to bad products like ME3 and DA2.

I didn't say its OK for them not to do their best. I think its wrong that you want to claim they DON'T do their best. They made a game that they absolutely loved and which they whole-heartedly believed in, and which they worked on for two years straight in likely tens of thousands of man-hours. You have no basis by which to claim that something you simply didn't like was somehow not a labor of love for these people.

[Dark_Caduceus]

Mass Effect 1 was the only game which really had a good deal of concepting, planning, and artistic detail... and damn does it show.

[Tritium315]

Zuka999 wrote...

wantedman dan wrote...

Now that is a more logical argument. The appeals you made there are much better. But simply saying "LAWL THEIR PROFESHUNALS" makes no logical sense.

I can certainly give you plenty of real arguments, I just have no desire to. You've done nothing but attack me since I entered this thread, so any desire I could have had has since been drained. Arguing with people who do nothing but attack supposed "logical fallacies" is never interesting because 99% of them have just read basic philosophy on some Wikipedia pages and use them to do nothing bus outrightly dismiss anything said by another person. I learned a long time ago its better to just make your statement and move on, unfortunately I'm bored right now and have nothing else to do.

In his defense you were a giant douche in your first post, just saying.

Zuka999 wrote...

ITT a bunch of non-writers thinking they can harsh on writers for writing how writers write

No one plans every detail of a story from the beginning, if you did you would be stuck with a rigid piece of crap.

 

[Urdnot Amenark]

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

Mass Effect 1 was the only game which really had a good deal of concepting, planning, and artistic detail... and damn does it show.

I think ME 2 was very intricate, and I liked the way it improved on many of the first's strengths. Except for the planet scanning and myriad hacking minigames, I found it to be exceptional in almost every single way possible. The characters, some stock archetypes, were still substantial although a few were definitely more developed than others. Then, all those HUB worlds you could visit? Fantastic.

The third, in my opinion, suffers the most due to everything outside of the main plot and N7 missions being centered at the Citadel as fetch quests. If those were more properly developed, as well as issues pertaining to the resolution of the main conflict, I think I would've liked it better than the second. Scaling back the dialogue tree also hurt the game quite a bit. Then, there's the little variety you see in the differences of some of the more important choices you make as well, and the way EMS was implemented. Overall, I just think it was a bit obtuse, but otherwise something I still enjoyed experiencing; it especially succeeds in terms of cinematic execution.

[Harbinger of your Destiny]

Well that's it Bioware the only way to salvage this IP is to burn ME3 to the ground and start over.

[The Twilight God]

Harbinger of your Destiny wrote...

Well that's it Bioware the only way to salvage this IP is to burn ME3 to the ground and start over.

ME3 as a whole was fine up until immediately after Anderson dies.

The ending is what contradicted and ignored all the themes built upon throughout the series.

Modifié par The Twilight God, 08 juillet 2012 - 09:34 .

[Dark_Caduceus]

Urdnot Amenark wrote...

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

Mass Effect 1 was the only game which really had a good deal of concepting, planning, and artistic detail... and damn does it show.

I think ME 2 was very intricate, and I liked the way it improved on many of the first's strengths. Except for the planet scanning and myriad hacking minigames, I found it to be exceptional in almost every single way possible. The characters, some stock archetypes, were still substantial although a few were definitely more developed than others. Then, all those HUB worlds you could visit? Fantastic.

The third, in my opinion, suffers the most due to everything outside of the main plot and N7 missions being centered at the Citadel as fetch quests. If those were more properly developed, as well as issues pertaining to the resolution of the main conflict, I think I would've liked it better than the second. Scaling back the dialogue tree also hurt the game quite a bit. Then, there's the little variety you see in the differences of some of the more important choices you make as well, and the way EMS was implemented. Overall, I just think it was a bit obtuse, but otherwise something I still enjoyed experiencing; it especially succeeds in terms of cinematic execution.

They didn't improve the Mako, or planet exploration, the plot was far weaker, characters were many, and generally not very good. They ditched all the good, intricate ideas from ME1 and replaced them with trash like planet scanning. HUB worlds were okay, a bit too small for my liking. The Citadel sucked, though Omega was alright. Noveria and the ME1 Citadel were stronger I feel.

[Binary_Helix 1]

Dark_Caduceus wrote...

Mass Effect 1 was the only game which really had a good deal of concepting, planning, and artistic detail... and damn does it show.

Agreed.

[Jeb231]

I've known this since ME2. By the end of it it was painfully obvious they would have troubles finishing the fight in a satisfactory manner as the plot didn't advance in any meaningful way.

[devSin]

Well, I'll just say that the interview was prior to release, and they were possibly still oblivious as to just how bad the plot and the ending really were.

As for planning it in advance, it was clear all along that they had no idea where they were going. Things that happened in ME stopped making sense all throughout ME2, and you could tell then that this wasn't going to be a cohesive story that had been outlined in advnace.

Modifié par devSin, 08 juillet 2012 - 09:06 .

[Henioo]

There was no foreshadowing for most of the new crap of ME3 in the previous MEs. Ergo, it wasn't planned.

[ld1449]

devSin wrote...

Well, I'll just say that the interview was prior to release, and they were possibly still oblivious as to just how bad the plot and the ending really were.

As for planning it in advance, it was clear all along that they had no idea where they were going. Things that happened in ME stopped making sense all throughout ME2, and you could tell then that this wasn't going to be a cohesive story that had been outlined in advnace.

Not really sure if it was some guy just spouting nonsense but I heard all he's really done before this is comic books and such.

At any rate, who else would LOVE to be a fly on the wall at Bioware??? I genuinely want to see how they're all taking this. I can't immagine its all smiles and pats on the back behind closed doors.

[Seboist]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

I would think that the incredibly inconsistent portrayals of things like Cerberus and the geth from game to game would have made this obvious to most people.

And with Liara changing personas more often than a main character in a "Persona" game.

[Seboist]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Seboist wrote...

Cthulhu42 wrote...

I would think that the incredibly inconsistent portrayals of things like Cerberus and the geth from game to game would have made this obvious to most people.

And with Liara changing personas more often than a main character in a "Persona" game.

Oh, yes, from naive archeologist to ruthless information broker.  Not a jarring shift at all.

There was already a jarring shift in ME1. She goes from being a socially inept archeologist bookworm hermit that doesn't even comprehend humor(lol) and has no sign of any combat training to some badass Asari commando that's fit to be in a special forces squad composed of battle hardened military veterans like Shepard, Wrex,Garrus and both the human squadmates. 

Modifié par Seboist, 08 juillet 2012 - 09:24 .

[Malanek]

I really don't like how this is done. Sure things evolve when writing but it needs to be done in an "organic manner" or you end up with inconsistency. The main plot should have been conceived, then when you get all the different choices you stop and think, how would that effect the plot, and then write it in based on a logical conclusion. In this case the reapers origin and the way they could be defeated should have been conceived at the start.

I don't have a problem with the writing in the ME series. But so much of it got by on the original concept and then pure character emotion. The overall direction was well below the standard of those aspects and this revelation helps explain why.

[Memnon]

Well I don't blame them for not having the entire trilogy planned out when they wrapped up ME1 - they always said how surprised they were at how popular the game was. I am a little surprised at how little they thought about ME3 while doing ME2, though ...

Can't help but snicker at the folks who claim that Bioware had planned the Catalyst from the very beginning though ...

Modifié par Stornskar, 08 juillet 2012 - 09:34 .

[dointime85]

Why am I not surprised?

But seriously, even with the approach they took, I feel they could have done a better job using previous plot points to develop the story of later games.

Let's take the fact, that the reapers have to "walk" all the way from darkspace in order to commit their genocide. Obviously, this was supposed to be a major inconvenience to them as Sovereign would otherwise not have bothered to open the shortcut first by manipulating the Rachni and then with the help of the Geth which took him much longer than the Reapers needed to travel all the way. Even if it had not been the most original idea, it would have made sense to develop a story in which this additional expense of energy, fuel and stuff could have been the source of weakness for the reapers.

Or even if they decided to drop the dark energy plot (which was probably a good decision), the strange development of Haestrom was obviously due to physical processes which involved massive amounts of energy and were yet to be understood at the time. The quarians obviously studied this process. Their knowledge could have been a key component to complete the crucible and given their situation, they surely would have to be convinced to hand it over to the council races in their fight against the reapers.

Neither one of the possibilities would have required a fully fleshed out plot at the time of ME1 but they would have helped to tie the plots of ME1-3 more closely together. Instead, the whole crucible part feels very detached from the rest of the story.

[comrade gando]

thank baby jesus he's not writing the DLC for the game. maybe the more sensible writers can repair the damage he has done through DLC.

[ld1449]

comrade gando wrote...

thank baby jesus he's not writing the DLC for the game. maybe the more sensible writers can repair the damage he has done through DLC.

Lol with the ending as is? It'll be like repairing the plumbing while the roof of the house burns.

[comrade gando]

ld1449 wrote...

comrade gando wrote...

thank baby jesus he's not writing the DLC for the game. maybe the more sensible writers can repair the damage he has done through DLC.

Lol with the ending as is? It'll be like repairing the plumbing while the roof of the house burns.

for the sake of the series they HAVE to do something. it's one disgrace of an ending reserved only for the most mediocre of sci fi games. completely tarnishes the experience right at the very end. they have to fix it.

[Hennex]

Stornskar wrote...

Can't help but snicker at the folks who claim that Bioware had planned the Catalyst from the very beginning though ...

People actually thought the Catalyst was planned?  It felt like the exact opposite.

[Xenite]

To be honest it just feels like they have completely forgotten why Origins is such a beloved game.

Origins gave the player the ability to steer the course of his character to an ending that felt shaped by the player, Mass Effect did this as well to a slightly smaller extent.

ME3's ending felt like the concept was completely abandoned, it was no longer our story it was Casey Hudson's and Walters ideal story for THEM. It's no coincidence that players feel pushed into choosing Synthesis, it's what they wanted.

All we can hope is they are not allowed this amount of creative control of a project again. They have completely destroyed an entire franchise.

[Sarevok Synder]

comrade gando wrote...

For the sake of the series they HAVE to do something. it's one disgrace of an ending reserved only for the most mediocre of sci fi games. completely tarnishes the experience right at the very end. they have to fix it.

Unfortunately they consider it fixed. I can't imagine the DLCs will sell very well either, considering it's likely they won't add to/change the endings in any way.