760 réponses à ce sujet

[PuppiesOfDeath2]

Vega nicknames him "Cabbage Hands." Which is way better than "Loco."

[Taboo]

A basic understanding of storytelling devices, and common sense would normally dictate a genuine response here.

But people just sit here and grouse. And grouse. And grouse.

Do you seriously ****ing think that they included this JUST to troll you? Has anyone here studied theater? Film language? Storytelling?

???

It's not an impossible math problem. Put two and two together.

[Reorte]

Taboo-XX wrote...

A basic understanding of storytelling devices, and common sense would normally dictate a genuine response here.

But people just sit here and grouse. And grouse. And grouse.

Do you seriously ****ing think that they included this JUST to troll you? Has anyone here studied theater? Film language? Storytelling?

???

It's not an impossible math problem. Put two and two together.

You still insisting on that? That it's good because it has to rely on cliched crap storytelling devices because it says sod all at face value? Just because something has been done before doesn't make it any good - have you never groaned when something ends "But it was all just a dream?" (says a lot that some people would actually prefer that). It's not putting two and two together. It's putting 1.8 and 1.8 together but you're still insisting that it's 100% definitely 4.

Yes, we know what their intention is (just as we know their intention was to portray the abomination of Synthesis as something wonderful with no drawbacks at all). You have to study theatre or film to be sure about what they mean? Well that's a big failure right there. Intention means sod all when the immediate emotional reaction (which is what stories are all about) goes on precisely what we see, no more, no less. I'm sure we can all agree on the intention but don't pretend that it works. In the hands of a decent writer some well-worn devices are used because they are known to work in the right circumstances but you're looking at it completely backwards - arguing that you can therefore chuck those devices in regardless and it will work. They are not successful when they work simply because they've been used before, and using them does not make something succesful.

If "Shepard breathes" doesn't leave a little niggling doubt at the back of your mind then quite honestly you're too credulous.

Modifié par Reorte, 17 juillet 2012 - 11:12 .

[Hudathan]

wright1978 wrote...

Most people hated Bioware's original completely ambigious endings. They promised to provide clarification and closure. However they were too cheap to clarify the Shep lives ending.

'Shepard lives' is just enough content to differentiate that version of the ending from the rest but not so much that it feels like a longer and more cannon version for the players. It needs to simply be a plausible outcome for that particular scenario. My g/f beat the game for the first time, took the Destroy option, and got the breathing scene. She thought it was a nice surprise at the end and an organic outcome of her story, and that's how it should be.

[Taboo]

Yes unfortunately you do. That's why it's a failure.

No one here has any understanding of dramatic conventions.

I see this all the ****ing time. It's not new.

William Friedken did this forty years ago in The French Connection.

Carol Reed did this over sixty years ago in The Third Man.

And D.W Griffith did it almost one hundred years ago in his appalling The Birth of a Nation.

[Reorte]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Yes unfortunately you do. That's why it's a failure.

No one here has any understanding of dramatic conventions.

They become conventions because they work in the context when they were used well. They do not work in their own right simply because they are conventions. You understand what the conventions are but it doesn't look like you understand why they are.

[Taboo]

Reorte wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Yes unfortunately you do. That's why it's a failure.

No one here has any understanding of dramatic conventions.

They become conventions because they work in the context when they were used well. They do not work in their own right simply because they are conventions. You understand what the conventions are but it doesn't look like you understand why they are.

I've written papers on them.

Many papers.

I've even written essays on explicit sex in film. There is very little I haven't seen.

And that's in my spare time, when I'm not playing fetch for a producer.

[Reorte]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Yes unfortunately you do. That's why it's a failure.

No one here has any understanding of dramatic conventions.

They become conventions because they work in the context when they were used well. They do not work in their own right simply because they are conventions. You understand what the conventions are but it doesn't look like you understand why they are.

I've written papers on them.

Many papers.

I've even written essays on explicit sex in film. There is very little I haven't seen.

And that's in my spare time, when I'm not playing fetch for a producer.

So? Your position appears to be "This has worked in plenty of films in the past therefore it always works". That's a pretty weak argument and resorting to claiming to be an authority doesn't make it any stronger, even if you are one.

Modifié par Reorte, 17 juillet 2012 - 11:22 .

[Taboo]

Reorte wrote...

So? Your position appears to be "This has worked in plenty of films in the past therefore it always works". That's a pretty weak argument and resorting to claiming to be an authority doesn't make it any stronger, even if you are one.

I've never said it works for everyone. It doesn't.

But it's been employed many times before.

It's there for a reason.

[Reorte]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Reorte wrote...

So? Your position appears to be "This has worked in plenty of films in the past therefore it always works". That's a pretty weak argument and resorting to claiming to be an authority doesn't make it any stronger, even if you are one.

I've never said it works for everyone. It doesn't.

But it's been employed many times before.

It's there for a reason.

Yes, I know that. I don't see why prior usage makes the blindest bit of difference though, other than for giving the writers a toolbox of ideas to try out and see if any work with what they're creating. Whether or not that will work for any viewer or not will be largely the same whether it's been used a hundred times before or is completely original.

[Taboo]

Reorte wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Reorte wrote...

So? Your position appears to be "This has worked in plenty of films in the past therefore it always works". That's a pretty weak argument and resorting to claiming to be an authority doesn't make it any stronger, even if you are one.

I've never said it works for everyone. It doesn't.

But it's been employed many times before.

It's there for a reason.

Yes, I know that. I don't see why prior usage makes the blindest bit of difference though, other than for giving the writers a toolbox of ideas to try out and see if any work with what they're creating. Whether or not that will work for any viewer or not will be largely the same whether it's been used a hundred times before or is completely original.

I know this is getting old but...

Art.

That's just something you're going to have to accept.

The scene either works for you or it doesn't.

[Reorte]

Taboo-XX wrote...

I know this is getting old but...

Art.

That's just something you're going to have to accept.

The scene either works for you or it doesn't.

Well, I'll give you full marks for bravery for arguing "art" on BSN these days!

Sure, the scene works for some people but you seem very unwillng to accept that there are pretty solid reasons why it doesn't work for others. Just about anything works for someone, even the pre-EC endings. It being impossible to get anything other than Refuse would work for some people. Stopping at the start of the beam run would for some people (and it would certainly have had some advantages over what we got even though it would've resulted in me yelling at my monitor).

[Taboo]

Uh, I totally understand why it doesn't work for people. I've seen comments like this from people all the time.

My mother is the same way. *shudder*

It's just about how you think that's all.

Literalists won't like it. That's that.

[ziyon conqueror]

The Twilight God wrote...

The the Control ending he just makes a body, but more life-like than EDI's.

In Synthesis Shepard sprouts out of a giant cabbage patch in Iowa fully grown 2 weeks after the ending. Obviously anything is possible in synthesis ending.

Maybe in Synthesis, all the husks are resurrected as living beings and panic at their nakedness. lol

[ddraigcoch123]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Reorte wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

Reorte wrote...

So? Your position appears to be "This has worked in plenty of films in the past therefore it always works". That's a pretty weak argument and resorting to claiming to be an authority doesn't make it any stronger, even if you are one.

I've never said it works for everyone. It doesn't.

But it's been employed many times before.

It's there for a reason.

Yes, I know that. I don't see why prior usage makes the blindest bit of difference though, other than for giving the writers a toolbox of ideas to try out and see if any work with what they're creating. Whether or not that will work for any viewer or not will be largely the same whether it's been used a hundred times before or is completely original.

I know this is getting old but...

Art.

That's just something you're going to have to accept.

The scene either works for you or it doesn't.

Um... sorry  to burst your media expert bubble there matey... but this isnt film school, i didnt pay my money and invest over 100 hours of my time to be taught a lesson in cinematography, art house or otherwise, nor did i want a tutorial on the structure or otherwise of classic (that is to say overused) film conventions to 'twist' the tail of the tale... or to 'make the audience work for the ending'...

ME is an outstanding story telling journey and it very reason for being is to engage and involve the player (that would be me...) in the world BW has created for me and allow me to be an active agent in that digital universe using my 'avatar' (that would be shepard)... now the conventions within this 'production' have been clear so far... and with the option of a 'choice' of endings i am expecting a level of emotional/story telling parity between them...

The problem  i have is that there is no parity between them... and that i dont get the option of a final 'miracle' suicide mission (number 3) survive for my avatar (you notice i dont use the word actor as one would if i was talking about a film)... i.e. my shepard...

So everyone is probably getting a bit sick of hearing the same rehearsed arguments from either side... but let me try to be clear...

IF THERE ARE A RANGE OF ENDINGS DEPENDANT ON YOUR CHOICES THROUGH THE GAME (notice i dont say film) THEN I WANT MY 'SURVIVE' CHOICE TO GIVE ME AN EMOTIONAL PAY OFF THAT IN THE SAME WAY I GOT IT AT THE END OF ME1 AND ME2...

its an immersive rpg vid game... it does raise and try to make us engage (if you want to delve into the themes) with issues of what it is to be human/sentient... whether it is right to sacrifice a few for the many... what signifies self awareness etc... loved it... love being engaged on all those levels... but at the end of it all i am, somewhere inside, a kid playing a vid game that i want to win...

i realise i am not better than Pavlov's dog... but i am happy with my conditioned response to victory... it makes me happy.. happy is good.. and anytime i get tired of happy and winning i can choose one of the other non choices and kill myself for no good reason accomplishing the very ends that i have been fighting against since first travelling to eden prime...

Modifié par ddraigcoch123, 17 juillet 2012 - 11:58 .

[Iakus]

Taboo-XX wrote...

Reorte wrote...

So? Your position appears to be "This has worked in plenty of films in the past therefore it always works". That's a pretty weak argument and resorting to claiming to be an authority doesn't make it any stronger, even if you are one.

I've never said it works for everyone. It doesn't.

But it's been employed many times before.

It's there for a reason.

It doesn't work for many people.  Just because this is an acknowledged convention doesn't mean that

A) It's appropriate for this particular story and
It's done well anyway.

In this case, you know why it doesn't work?  No catharsis.  So much turmoil over what Shepard has witnessed, has been forced to do to save the galaxy (doom a race, betray a friend, risk killing him.herself)  And by some miracle of recruiting enough krogan, survives another suicide mission.  And there's no payoff.  Only a spark that maybe Shepard's not quite dead yet.  That's not an ending, that's a beginning at an ending.  

Night had fallen, and the curtain comes down before we see dawn.

[Reorte]

ddraigcoch123 wrote...

ME is an outstanding story telling journey and it very reason for being is to engage and involve the player (that would be me...) in the world BW has created for me and allow me to be an active agent in that digital universe using my 'avatar' (that would be shepard)... now the conventions within this 'production' have been clear so far... and with the option of a 'choice' of endings i am expecting a level of emotional/story telling parity between them...

Well, I wouldn't agree that ME has ever been outstanding in the story department but it's an interesting point that you bring up, namely the player involvement. It certainly gave me a much greater connection to ME than to any other work of fiction. Without it (say if it was a film) I think that it would've been fairly forgettable. How well do film conventions work in such a medium? The game as a means of telling a story is still a medium in its infancy after all.

[ddraigcoch123]

Reorte wrote...

ddraigcoch123 wrote...

ME is an outstanding story telling journey and it very reason for being is to engage and involve the player (that would be me...) in the world BW has created for me and allow me to be an active agent in that digital universe using my 'avatar' (that would be shepard)... now the conventions within this 'production' have been clear so far... and with the option of a 'choice' of endings i am expecting a level of emotional/story telling parity between them...

Well, I wouldn't agree that ME has ever been outstanding in the story department but it's an interesting point that you bring up, namely the player involvement. It certainly gave me a much greater connection to ME than to any other work of fiction. Without it (say if it was a film) I think that it would've been fairly forgettable. How well do film conventions work in such a medium? The game as a means of telling a story is still a medium in its infancy after all.

Well to be fair i did say' story telling journey' which was meant to put the story intself in the context of the playability and engagement of the game itself... but certainly agree with your posts comments re connection and game in its story telling infancy....

[Taboo]

OMFG this pizza is delicious.

Well that's the bum wrap for you. It sucks ass. All I can do to help you is tell you what things you could watch to make it a bit clearer.

Hudson is using film techniques here and he failed for the most part but that doesn't mean it can't be analyzed as such.

[vallore]

Taboo-XX wrote...

A basic understanding of storytelling devices, and common sense would normally dictate a genuine response here.

But people just sit here and grouse. And grouse. And grouse.

Do you seriously ****ing think that they included this JUST to troll you? Has anyone here studied theater? Film language? Storytelling?

???

It's not an impossible math problem. Put two and two together.

Does it seriously matter why they did include it? What does matter is why they didn’t figure out it wouldn’t work. After all, if it doesn’t work, it was there for the wrong reason. Better not to be there, in that way, at all.

They could have shown Shepard instead of hinting and that could have work fine. Even showing Shepard dying in the rubble, looking towards Earth would be more satisfying that what we got. And so would watching Shepard being rescued in extremis. But no, we got stuck with glimmers of hope.Figures.

[Iakus]

Taboo-XX wrote...

OMFG this pizza is delicious.

Well that's the bum wrap for you. It sucks ass. All I can do to help you is tell you what things you could watch to make it a bit clearer.

Hudson is using film techniques here and he failed for the most part but that doesn't mean it can't be analyzed as such.

And instead of going "We were way too ambiguous with our ending.  People kept saying how depressing it was.  Let's make it clearer and add closure to it"  They doubled down and kept the breath scene.

Same mistake.  Twice

[Taboo]

It's asking you to be a participant, that's all. Nothing more.

You're used to being passive, which is the problem.

If it doesn't work for you it never will unless you make an effort.

[Taboo]

iakus wrote...

Taboo-XX wrote...

OMFG this pizza is delicious.

Well that's the bum wrap for you. It sucks ass. All I can do to help you is tell you what things you could watch to make it a bit clearer.

Hudson is using film techniques here and he failed for the most part but that doesn't mean it can't be analyzed as such.

And instead of going "We were way too ambiguous with our ending.  People kept saying how depressing it was.  Let's make it clearer and add closure to it"  They doubled down and kept the breath scene.

Same mistake.  Twice

I was going to use it anyway because the intention was clear in the vanilla ending as well.

But it just doesn't work for some people.

[ddraigcoch123]

Taboo-XX wrote...

OMFG this pizza is delicious.

Well that's the bum wrap for you. It sucks ass. All I can do to help you is tell you what things you could watch to make it a bit clearer.

Hudson is using film techniques here and he failed for the most part but that doesn't mean it can't be analyzed as such.

Aw now if you had made it explicit that you were spending your time here spreading your amazing depth of knowledge and understanding of film and story telling and all that other stuff you know that us dumb vid game playing hicks who never went to media school or was a gofer for a production team couldn't possibly grasp without you pointing them out with just the right level of condensceding superiority... then i would have been taking notes...

as it is i thought we were discussing why some (probably quite a considerable number) feel let down and short changed by the editorial decision's made on closing the three act play/story arc with a 'little beacon of hope' rather than and 'ending'...

[Iakus]

Taboo-XX wrote...

It's asking you to be a participant, that's all. Nothing more.

You're used to being passive, which is the problem.

If it doesn't work for you it never will unless you make an effort.

You';re looking at this like a film.  This is not a film.  It's a game

Look at it like an RPG.  When the GM shuts down and stops communicating with the player, the player has nowhere to turn.  Has no way of determining what happened or what to do next.  No context,   The world grinds to a halt just as certainly as if the players got up from the table and left.

In this case, with minutes to go, the GM got up to get a drink and never came back.