251 réponses à ce sujet

[txgoldrush]

palician wrote...

Whatever you want to call it anything that is a simple "Enemies defeated!" button is an unimaginative and unconvincing resolution.


This a million times over.

No, the hero being able to cause a god like antagonist to rethink his solution and his methods IS imaginative.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 27 juillet 2012 - 05:25 .

[comrade gando]

palician wrote...

Whatever you want to call it anything that is a simple "Enemies defeated!" button is an unimaginative and unconvincing resolution.

It's super effective. Thread has fainted!

it's especially true because this is EXACTLY what mac n' casey said wouldn't happen. well lo and behold... it happened, along with the other half dozen things they lied about.

Modifié par comrade gando, 27 juillet 2012 - 05:27 .

[txgoldrush]

Ztrobos wrote...

dorktainian wrote...

way to end me3 without star brat. simple stuff. use harbinger as a boss. his will is the collective will of the reapers. shep and harbie fight inside the closed citadel. they knock lumps out of each other. TIM is revealed as Harbies avatar. Shep beats TIM. The Reapers retreat. The fleet finish them off. Finally Harbie begs shep for forgiveness. Harbie dies - variation of death due to paragon/renegade choices.

The galaxy is saved. Life goes on.

Cut to the future end of sheps life - with all his surviving friends there as he passes. time to remember the fallen and what has been lost to the reapers.

Then in a cutscene at the end of the credits a vague introduction to the next threat in the ME universe before cutting to black.

Way too much vanilla, how could anyone stomach it? Also it's the same ending as ME1, so it's not even better wrighting. Only more care-bear love. The more I read the more convinced I become that the ending is just fine. As a side note, I think it's ironic, and funny, that so many hack sci-fi wrighters are so vocal about their disdain of ME. They can't make a better ending, though not from a lack of trying, and ME still stacks up with the best pure sci-fi ever made, IMO.

The ending is just fine......its that people don't get it or want Bioware to keep being cliched.

[txgoldrush]

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

snipped


From TVTropes:

While Deus Ex, along with the two other games in the series, were named after the trope, they do not really feature it, though the original game does feature a Deus Est Machina.

• The protagonist of the first game was the dues ex. The beginning of the game is set in a crapsack world where corporations and conspiracies rule the world and it looks like nothing can improve it. Then Denton comes along and everything is changed. Almost no one could have predicted Denton's actions or just how drastically he would change the world around him. Thus to the any normal person looking to change the world Denton would appear to be a Deus Ex Machina. This is made all the more obvious by the fact that Denton is arguable a Deus Est Machina himself, being one of the worlds first nano-augmented soldiers.

I don't care what tvtropes said, I told you what a producer of the game Deus ex said.  Anyone can say whatever they want about it, the one producer said the references were basically jabs at other games that relied on DeMs.  Warren Spector thought the DeMs were poor techniques.

And a way to subvert the DEM is to have a protagonist fill in that role.....

[3DandBeyond]

txgoldrush wrote...


WRONG

Because TIM's character is about fighting the Reapers...as he is indoctrinated.

I assume you think merely because you have an opinion that anyone else's is WRONG.

I get what a DeM is, but you need to read up on what it is yourself.  Just because Shepard uses what s/he is given or told about does not make Shepard a DeM.  I've told you that writers have said the kid is-he is contrived.  It does not matter that he is the catalyst because they all thought the citadel was.  He dropped in with no foreshadowing of HIM.  The catalyst was thought to be a constructed station and not an AI reaper controller.

I have said that the solution of a DeM doesn't even have to be something the DeM owns but merely something he tells the character or shows the character at the end.

Plopping in a WRONG won't make your statements any more correct.  A person that wrote for Star Trek TNG and has written other tv shows and books has said he is a DeM carries far more weight than WRONG.  And others with some credentials (other SF and fiction writers) agree the kid is one.  RIGHT.

[3DandBeyond]

txgoldrush wrote...



And a way to subvert the DEM is to have a protagonist fill in that role.....

                                                                                                                                                                                  


In case you missed it he also said there are no DeMs in the game.  Whatever you may think he certainly did not make Denton one.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 27 juillet 2012 - 05:34 .

[Ztrobos]

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...


WRONG

Because TIM's character is about fighting the Reapers...as he is indoctrinated.

I assume you think merely because you have an opinion that anyone else's is WRONG.

I get what a DeM is, but you need to read up on what it is yourself.  Just because Shepard uses what s/he is given or told about does not make Shepard a DeM.  I've told you that writers have said the kid is-he is contrived.  It does not matter that he is the catalyst because they all thought the citadel was.  He dropped in with no foreshadowing of HIM.  The catalyst was thought to be a constructed station and not an AI reaper controller.

I have said that the solution of a DeM doesn't even have to be something the DeM owns but merely something he tells the character or shows the character at the end.

Plopping in a WRONG won't make your statements any more correct.  A person that wrote for Star Trek TNG and has written other tv shows and books has said he is a DeM carries far more weight than WRONG.  And others with some credentials (other SF and fiction writers) agree the kid is one.  RIGHT.

Star Trek TNG was not well written, at all. His opinion carry no weight.

[txgoldrush]

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...


WRONG

Because TIM's character is about fighting the Reapers...as he is indoctrinated.

I assume you think merely because you have an opinion that anyone else's is WRONG.

I get what a DeM is, but you need to read up on what it is yourself.  Just because Shepard uses what s/he is given or told about does not make Shepard a DeM.  I've told you that writers have said the kid is-he is contrived.  It does not matter that he is the catalyst because they all thought the citadel was.  He dropped in with no foreshadowing of HIM.  The catalyst was thought to be a constructed station and not an AI reaper controller.

I have said that the solution of a DeM doesn't even have to be something the DeM owns but merely something he tells the character or shows the character at the end.

Plopping in a WRONG won't make your statements any more correct.  A person that wrote for Star Trek TNG and has written other tv shows and books has said he is a DeM carries far more weight than WRONG.  And others with some credentials (other SF and fiction writers) agree the kid is one.  RIGHT.

Star trek TNG - the show that tries to hide DEM in technobabble...please. Nevermind Star Trek is infamous for using DEM. "Sacrifice of Angels" for instance.

And like I said once again.... a protagonist being a dues ex means that the trope doesn't exist because its the protagonist acting on the story and solving the problem.

Once again, who ultimately solves the problem? Shepard.

Fact: By Shepard and the galaxy bringing in the Crucible, he has "altered the variables", He has influenced the Catalyst. So the hero EARNS it. He has to work for it. Without Shep, the cycle continues.

Fact: Shepard is needed to enact the solutions as logically teh Catalyst can't enact them

Fact; Shepard is needed to not only enact synthesis, but prove to the Catalyst that organics are ready for it. Without Shepard, Catalyst can't realize his ideal outcome.

Really the only thing the Catalyst does is provide Shepard a "lift" and explains his motive and the choices and consquences of firing the Crucible. Nevermind the fact that the Catalyst adds dilemmas for Shepard. Really, he adds more problems.

Nevermind once again, it is established that the Catalyst is key to stopping the Reapers earlier. This makes your argument, irrelevant.

[txgoldrush]

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...



And a way to subvert the DEM is to have a protagonist fill in that role.....

                                                                                                                                                                                  


In case you missed it he also said there are no DeMs in the game.  Whatever you may think he certainly did not make Denton one.

For the thousandth time..there is no DEMs used narrative wise because the protagonist acts like one.

From an overall narrative perspective, JC is the protagonist being the protagonist. He is shaping the world. Therefore the story doesn't involve DEM in the narrative sense.

But for an ingame character, from their POV, JC is the miraculous solution to an unsolvable problem.

You aren't getting this.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 27 juillet 2012 - 05:45 .

[grey_wind]

Had they actually explored ideas like why the Reapers need to divide the galaxy in order to conquer it, then they could have justified a conventional victory by showing that while the Reapers could easily take down sectioned off portions of the galaxy, they did not have the numbers needed to fight a fully united galaxy (their low numbers could be a side effect of being so picky about the species they use in their reproduction process).
Then a plot device like the Reaper IFF from ME2 could have easily been the focus of getting past the Relay lockdown and uniting the various races when the Citadel was seized and the galaxy was left divided and without contact.

[3DandBeyond]

txgoldrush wrote...


The ending is just fine......its that people don't get it or want Bioware to keep being cliched.

Well, you obviously have failed to read a word of what people have said about it.  You have instead formed an opinion on what they think without paying them the respect of at least reading what they've said.

The usual statement from people that "like" the endings-they are ok, not what they wanted but they can live with them.  That's real praise.  And believe me I actually read the things.

People do understand the endings, they find them repugnant, depressing, and abhorrent, and in fact they are cliche because they were taken from other sources, Deus ex for example.  Babylon 5 chaos and order.  Matrix revolutions.  The endings are horrid.  And not one person can say they hoped this or something like it was how ME would end when they started ME1 or 2 or even 3. 

The goal of ME before ME3's ending: Destroy the reapers
The goal of ME at ME3's ending: solve the enemy's problem which is not Shepard's or the galaxy's problem

[3DandBeyond]

txgoldrush wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...



And a way to subvert the DEM is to have a protagonist fill in that role.....

                                                                                                                                                                                  


In case you missed it he also said there are no DeMs in the game.  Whatever you may think he certainly did not make Denton one.

For the thousandth time..there is no DEMs used narrative wise because the protagonist acts like one.

You can say that all you want but the actual dev of the game carries more weight. 

[3DandBeyond]

txgoldrush wrote...

For the thousandth time..there is no DEMs used narrative wise because the protagonist acts like one.

From an overall narrative perspective, JC is the protagonist being the protagonist. He is shaping the world. Therefore the story doesn't involve DEM in the narrative sense.

But for an ingame character, from their POV, JC is the miraculous solution to an unsolvable problem.

You aren't getting this.

Yes I am.  Getting back to the relevant game, Shepard ingame is known to everyone and is not dropped in from out of nowhere to solve the problem.  Shepard has been working on the problem ever since the beginning of ME1.  That's the problem Shepard is there to solve and it only becomes the problem for everyone else in ME3.  If the problem already existed and Shepard has already been trying to solve it and uses god boy's solution that does not make Shepard any kind of DeM at all.  Shepard is known and not contrived.  You can keep asserting something but known characters are not DeMs.

In fact in even asserting that something is a DeM you are proving that the ending is weak and flawed-the very reason for using any kind of DeM.

The kid is almost a textbook definition of one, so I don't care if Shepard dons a t shirt that says "I wanna be a DeM", he isn't acting like one, doesn't look like one, and isn't one.

Modifié par 3DandBeyond, 27 juillet 2012 - 05:55 .

[txgoldrush]

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...


The ending is just fine......its that people don't get it or want Bioware to keep being cliched.

Well, you obviously have failed to read a word of what people have said about it.  You have instead formed an opinion on what they think without paying them the respect of at least reading what they've said.

The usual statement from people that "like" the endings-they are ok, not what they wanted but they can live with them.  That's real praise.  And believe me I actually read the things.

People do understand the endings, they find them repugnant, depressing, and abhorrent, and in fact they are cliche because they were taken from other sources, Deus ex for example.  Babylon 5 chaos and order.  Matrix revolutions.  The endings are horrid.  And not one person can say they hoped this or something like it was how ME would end when they started ME1 or 2 or even 3. 

The goal of ME before ME3's ending: Destroy the reapers
The goal of ME at ME3's ending: solve the enemy's problem which is not Shepard's or the galaxy's problem

First off, only synthesis is taken from DX.....actually Inv War.

Second....the DXIW and DXHR, as well as some other games, you can join the antagonist. In some cases, like Golden Sun, the antagonists (of the first game, in the second they are the protagonists) are the ones that are right and the protagonists of the first game join them.

Nevermind Watchmen, the heroes agree to the mass murdering antagonist......and the hero dissenter is killed.

And ummm....the enemy's problem IS the galaxy's problem....its the cycle. Nevermind that throughout the trilogy, the conflict between created and creators do exist. Nevermind that Shepard can destroy the Reapers as intended.

And part of storytelling is not getting the ending you expect.

[txgoldrush]

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...



And a way to subvert the DEM is to have a protagonist fill in that role.....

                                                                                                                                                                                  


In case you missed it he also said there are no DeMs in the game.  Whatever you may think he certainly did not make Denton one.

For the thousandth time..there is no DEMs used narrative wise because the protagonist acts like one.

You can say that all you want but the actual dev of the game carries more weight. 

However Warren Spector is a fan of Diablous Ex Machina...Ultima VII part Two is full of them.

[txgoldrush]

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

For the thousandth time..there is no DEMs used narrative wise because the protagonist acts like one.

From an overall narrative perspective, JC is the protagonist being the protagonist. He is shaping the world. Therefore the story doesn't involve DEM in the narrative sense.

But for an ingame character, from their POV, JC is the miraculous solution to an unsolvable problem.

You aren't getting this.

Yes I am.  Getting back to the relevant game, Shepard ingame is known to everyone and is not dropped in from out of nowhere to solve the problem.  Shepard has been working on the problem ever since the beginning of ME1.  That's the problem Shepard is there to solve and it only becomes the problem for everyone else in ME3.  If the problem already existed and Shepard has already been trying to solve it and uses god boy's solution that does not make Shepard any kind of DeM at all.  Shepard is known and not contrived.  You can keep asserting something but known characters are not DeMs.

In fact in even asserting that something is a DeM you are proving that the ending is weak and flawed-the very reason for using any kind of DeM.

The kid is almost a textbook definition of one, so I don't care if Shepard dons a t shirt that says "I wanna be a DeM", he isn't acting like one, doesn't look like one, and isn't one.

But once again...to OTHER CHARACTERS, he is a "DEM", the miraculous solution to an unsolvable problem. To us the VIEWER he is not.

You don;t get it.

And really, only synthesis is "god boy's " solution.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 27 juillet 2012 - 06:04 .

[Ztrobos]

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...


The ending is just fine......its that people don't get it or want Bioware to keep being cliched.

Well, you obviously have failed to read a word of what people have said about it.  You have instead formed an opinion on what they think without paying them the respect of at least reading what they've said.

The usual statement from people that "like" the endings-they are ok, not what they wanted but they can live with them.  That's real praise.  And believe me I actually read the things.

People do understand the endings, they find them repugnant, depressing, and abhorrent, and in fact they are cliche because they were taken from other sources, Deus ex for example.  Babylon 5 chaos and order.  Matrix revolutions.  The endings are horrid.  And not one person can say they hoped this or something like it was how ME would end when they started ME1 or 2 or even 3. 

The goal of ME before ME3's ending: Destroy the reapers
The goal of ME at ME3's ending: solve the enemy's problem which is not Shepard's or the galaxy's problem

MMEEEE I GOT WHAT I WANTED. SHOT LEGION IN THE FACE TYRNED HIS RACE BACK TO RUST, SAVED EARTH. FRIED EDI. FRAGGED ALL SYNTHETIC BASTERDS. PURE WIN.




G

[3DandBeyond]

txgoldrush wrote...


First off, only synthesis is taken from DX.....actually Inv War.

Second....the DXIW and DXHR, as well as some other games, you can join the antagonist. In some cases, like Golden Sun, the antagonists (of the first game, in the second they are the protagonists) are the ones that are right and the protagonists of the first game join them.

Nevermind Watchmen, the heroes agree to the mass murdering antagonist......and the hero dissenter is killed.

And ummm....the enemy's problem IS the galaxy's problem....its the cycle. Nevermind that throughout the trilogy, the conflict between created and creators do exist. Nevermind that Shepard can destroy the Reapers as intended.

And part of storytelling is not getting the ending you expect.

Part of good storytelling is making an ending that is not contrived (that is cliche) and that actually remembers and fits with the rest of the story (ies) that came before.  ME3 totally ignores most of ME2 and major portions of ME1 and is like some fantasy at the end, not set in the ME gaming or story universe at all.  You don't even play it at the end and the choices did not develop naturally out of any decisions you made nor did the whole ending.  It's a patchwork of other story ideas.

And as far as Deus ex-the ending featured factions wanting Denton to rule (control) the world, destroy global communications creating a dark age--in the final hours the Bioware devs said the crucible would create a galactic dark ages---, and Helios wishes to merge with Denton and rule the world as a benevolent dictator with infinite knowledge and reason.

No the kid's problem is chaos and order and synthetics vs. organics.  The galaxy's problem is the reapers. 

All choices that exist within the citadel are poison and of unknown origin.  Any information on them comes from the kid.  And any one of them solves his problem with unacceptable consequences.  Forced eugenics and assault, genocide, and a god reaper with Shepard's intelligence but not Shepard's feelings.  The only alternative is suicide.

[palician]

txgoldrush wrote...

palician wrote...

Whatever you want to call it anything that is a simple "Enemies defeated!" button is an unimaginative and unconvincing resolution.


This a million times over.

No, the hero being able to cause a god like antagonist to rethink his solution and his methods IS imaginative.

Broken down into its most basic form.Its A button that makes the reapers go away.Pro writers should be able to come up with something(ANYTHING)better than that.But I suppose simple things please simple minds.

[palician]

Part of good storytelling is making an ending that is not contrived (that is cliche) and that actually remembers and fits with the rest of the story (ies) that came before.  ME3 totally ignores most of ME2 and major portions of ME1 and is like some fantasy at the end, not set in the ME gaming or story universe at all.  You don't even play it at the end and the choices did not develop naturally out of any decisions you made nor did the whole ending.  It's a patchwork of other story ideas.[/quote]
This

[3DandBeyond]

txgoldrush wrote...

But once again...to OTHER CHARACTERS, he is a "DEM", the miraculous solution to an unsolvable problem. To us the VIEWER he is not.

You don;t get it.

And really, only synthesis is "god boy's " solution.

Yes I do and no s/he isn't.  Shepard is known to everyone-they all call Shepard by name.  Shepard introduced them to the problem.  I get what you are saying but it's flawed.  No matter the POV, Shepard is not seen as that and even so it's irrelevant.  What matters is what the player sees.  Shepard does not replace plot points in the story from other characters' POV, because to them it is the real world.  DeM exist in stories to replace plot points and part of the story from the reader's POV because to the reader it is fiction.

In my real life someone could drop in and save me by solving a problem-that does not make that person a DeM.  But you are saying it does from a character's real world perspective.  That is not so.  And even if it was so, Shepard is not one to them because Shepard introduced the problem and is using a solution provided by someone else.  Shepard did not pull the solution, flawed as it is, out of his/her nether regions.  Shepard was shown the solutions by god boy.

[StrawberryRainPop]

sporeian wrote...

As we all know, The Crucible and The Catalyst tend to be the very incarnation of DEM. However, it was kind of inevitable considering the unconventional means needed to defeat the reapers. 

Yes. Its called good writing, and knowing the ending and planning from it from the get go.

Modifié par StrawberryRainPop, 27 juillet 2012 - 06:21 .

[txgoldrush]

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...


First off, only synthesis is taken from DX.....actually Inv War.

Second....the DXIW and DXHR, as well as some other games, you can join the antagonist. In some cases, like Golden Sun, the antagonists (of the first game, in the second they are the protagonists) are the ones that are right and the protagonists of the first game join them.

Nevermind Watchmen, the heroes agree to the mass murdering antagonist......and the hero dissenter is killed.

And ummm....the enemy's problem IS the galaxy's problem....its the cycle. Nevermind that throughout the trilogy, the conflict between created and creators do exist. Nevermind that Shepard can destroy the Reapers as intended.

And part of storytelling is not getting the ending you expect.

Part of good storytelling is making an ending that is not contrived (that is cliche) and that actually remembers and fits with the rest of the story (ies) that came before.  ME3 totally ignores most of ME2 and major portions of ME1 and is like some fantasy at the end, not set in the ME gaming or story universe at all.  You don't even play it at the end and the choices did not develop naturally out of any decisions you made nor did the whole ending.  It's a patchwork of other story ideas.

And as far as Deus ex-the ending featured factions wanting Denton to rule (control) the world, destroy global communications creating a dark age--in the final hours the Bioware devs said the crucible would create a galactic dark ages---, and Helios wishes to merge with Denton and rule the world as a benevolent dictator with infinite knowledge and reason.

No the kid's problem is chaos and order and synthetics vs. organics.  The galaxy's problem is the reapers. 

All choices that exist within the citadel are poison and of unknown origin.  Any information on them comes from the kid.  And any one of them solves his problem with unacceptable consequences.  Forced eugenics and assault, genocide, and a god reaper with Shepard's intelligence but not Shepard's feelings.  The only alternative is suicide.

"No the kid's problem is chaos and order and synthetics vs. organics. The galaxy's problem is the reapers. "

And did you miss the fact that he is his own problem, a synthetic that rebelled against his organic creators, causing the Reapers to be the galaxy's problem?

"And as far as Deus ex-the ending featured factions wanting Denton to rule (control) the world, destroy global communications creating a dark age--in the final hours the Bioware devs said the crucible would create a galactic dark ages---, and Helios wishes to merge with Denton and rule the world as a benevolent dictator with infinite knowledge and reason."

ME series features those that want to destroy the Reapers.....Anderson being the symbol......those that wanted to Control the Reapers....TIM and Cerberus....and those that want synthesis...Catalyst and somewhat Saren.

The Crucible only creates the Dark Ages with low EMS, its a fail ending. The EC suggest other wise for higher EMS.

"ME3 totally ignores most of ME2 and major portions of ME1 and is like some fantasy at the end, not set in the ME gaming or story universe at all. You don't even play it at the end and the choices did not develop naturally out of any decisions you made nor did the whole ending. It's a patchwork of other story ideas."

Wrong.....nevermind Saren in ME1 whats to meld organics and synthetics together. Nevermind that the whole trilogy featured conflicts between the "created" and the "creators". Nevermind that TIM is a poster boy for control throughout ME3. Nevermind that all choices in the end involve sacrifice....the MAIN theme of Mass Effect 3.

They connect, you just don't want them to.

[txgoldrush]

3DandBeyond wrote...

txgoldrush wrote...

But once again...to OTHER CHARACTERS, he is a "DEM", the miraculous solution to an unsolvable problem. To us the VIEWER he is not.

You don;t get it.

And really, only synthesis is "god boy's " solution.

Yes I do and no s/he isn't.  Shepard is known to everyone-they all call Shepard by name.  Shepard introduced them to the problem.  I get what you are saying but it's flawed.  No matter the POV, Shepard is not seen as that and even so it's irrelevant.  What matters is what the player sees.  Shepard does not replace plot points in the story from other characters' POV, because to them it is the real world.  DeM exist in stories to replace plot points and part of the story from the reader's POV because to the reader it is fiction.

In my real life someone could drop in and save me by solving a problem-that does not make that person a DeM.  But you are saying it does from a character's real world perspective.  That is not so.  And even if it was so, Shepard is not one to them because Shepard introduced the problem and is using a solution provided by someone else.  Shepard did not pull the solution, flawed as it is, out of his/her nether regions.  Shepard was shown the solutions by god boy.

Shepard is seen as a miracle worker and a hero, one that fixes the problems and does the impossible. Thats clear enough.

Nevermind the fact once again that Shepard and his allies sets up the Crucible.....face it, the Catalyst doesn't explain th efinal choices if Shepard doesn't set it up. Simply put, once again, Shepard basically conviced by allowing the Crucible to be docked that the villians methods do not work anymore.

You keep ignoring this fact. God boy doesn't just interevene because the hero is powerless....he intervenes because the hero intervened.

Once again, if it wasn't for Shep, the cycle continues.

[GeoGirl2008]

I much preferred things when the reapers were just giant sentient machines that used organic races to reproduce. Had they left things that way, there would have been no need for the catalyst or his crazy logic... Sometimes the simplest explanations are the best ones... Then Shep would just have had to gather the war assets, get the crucible built, set it off and the big baddies would have been defeated. Cue victorious music, show people rebuilding, and Shep rides off into the sunset wih his/her L.I.