80611 réponses à ce sujet

[estebanus]

BatmanTurian wrote...

estebanus wrote...

401 Kill wrote...

estebanus wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...
Well of course not if it wasn't their intention. If it was, you can bet they care about it a lot. I hope literal is wrong just because synthesis is an appauling crime.

Assuming if they did, of course. However, then they'd have said something wouldn't they?

If it was their intention: Why spoil the surprise? 

If it wasn't, I seriously doubt their ability to write even the simplest of stories. (Unless of course they go with "The Puzzle Theory", they do claim to take ideas from fans right:lol:?

Oh yeah, I can totally see how much they cared about the fans' demands after experiencing the game myself.

Has it ever ocurred to you that both Casey and Walters aren't good writers? I mean, the main storyline (AKA the crucible plot) totally gave that away.

Are you feeling alright, estebanus? You don't sound like your usual self.

How so?

[D.Sharrah]

Been doing a playthrough to try and get set-up for Omega...is there a consensus on when "it will fit naturally with the current storyline" ...I was thinking about trying to have everything done up to Sanctuary...

[BansheeOwnage]

estebanus wrote...

There were over 1 million people who played Mass Effect, the total amount of peole who started rebelling about the ending is about 100.000 people. That is very far away from most people.
Look, the anti-enders have it right, I'm not disputing that. It's also tre that the entire BSN went up against the endings, but these people are the hardcore fans, those, that care about Mass Effect. Most people probably said "meh, good game, bad ending" because they had little to no emtional attachment to the franchise.

Where are you getting these numbers? And Bioware needs at least some of the fanbase!

[Dwailing]

estebanus wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

estebanus wrote...

401 Kill wrote...

estebanus wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...
Well of course not if it wasn't their intention. If it was, you can bet they care about it a lot. I hope literal is wrong just because synthesis is an appauling crime.

Assuming if they did, of course. However, then they'd have said something wouldn't they?

If it was their intention: Why spoil the surprise? 

If it wasn't, I seriously doubt their ability to write even the simplest of stories. (Unless of course they go with "The Puzzle Theory", they do claim to take ideas from fans right:lol:?

Oh yeah, I can totally see how much they cared about the fans' demands after experiencing the game myself.

Has it ever ocurred to you that both Casey and Walters aren't good writers? I mean, the main storyline (AKA the crucible plot) totally gave that away.

Are you feeling alright, estebanus? You don't sound like your usual self.

How so?

You're giving rifneno a run for his money when it comes to cynicism and you're being a total killjoy, to put it bluntly.

Edit: You're not the most optimistic guy to begin with (no offence), but this is depressing even for you.

Modifié par Dwailing, 21 octobre 2012 - 10:32 .

[BansheeOwnage]

[quote]estebanus wrote...

Are you feeling alright, estebanus? You don't sound like your usual self.

[/quote]How so?
[/quote]
In every way?

[BansheeOwnage]

paxxton wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

paxxton wrote...

401 Kill wrote...

Oh come on, the majority of the fans who played Mass Effect 3 hated the original endings. They have NOT fixed a single thing, the fact that we are still going on about the endings speaks volumes.

But we talk about it because we see its value.

I didn't discard you because I knew your value.

TIM?

I... tried Paxxton.

[D.Sharrah]

estebanus wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

estebanus wrote...

401 Kill wrote...

estebanus wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...
Well of course not if it wasn't their intention. If it was, you can bet they care about it a lot. I hope literal is wrong just because synthesis is an appauling crime.

Assuming if they did, of course. However, then they'd have said something wouldn't they?

If it was their intention: Why spoil the surprise? 

If it wasn't, I seriously doubt their ability to write even the simplest of stories. (Unless of course they go with "The Puzzle Theory", they do claim to take ideas from fans right:lol:?

Oh yeah, I can totally see how much they cared about the fans' demands after experiencing the game myself.

Has it ever ocurred to you that both Casey and Walters aren't good writers? I mean, the main storyline (AKA the crucible plot) totally gave that away.

Are you feeling alright, estebanus? You don't sound like your usual self.

How so?

Could be wrong...but I think its that you seem anti-IT now...whereas before you were a staucnh supporter...not that it's wrong - but sometimes change takes time to get used to...

Edit: 'd in so many ways...

Modifié par D.Sharrah, 21 octobre 2012 - 10:33 .

[BansheeOwnage]

estebanus wrote...

How can a Macguffin be seen as great writing? A weapon that up until the ending essentially is a long-lost reaper-off button?

EDIT: top. Meh.

Well, I agree that literal is terrible writing. But in IT, it is unknown if the crucible is actually an off button or not. There is ample foreshadowing that it's a trap.

[401 Kill]

estebanus wrote...

Restrider wrote...

I have to say that ME 2 main plot was not the best of the whole tilogy.
Yet, the main plot is not what ME 2 is about.
ME 2 expands the universe vastly and shows us a lot of new places and deepens already known characters and introduces new characters adequately. That's what made ME 2 great.

Exactly. It was character-based, not story-based.

And they plan on removing the greatest charecter of them all in ME4. I don't buy it.

If ME4 comes around and Shepard is not in it, I will say that they have no idea what they are doing, and give up on the Mass Effect series.

I have not given up on them yet.

[paxxton]

D.Sharrah wrote...

Been doing a playthrough to try and get set-up for Omega...is there a consensus on when "it will fit naturally with the current storyline" ...I was thinking about trying to have everything done up to Sanctuary...

Act 2 is the part Omega DLC should be played in.

[BansheeOwnage]

D.Sharrah wrote...

Could be wrong...but I think its that you seem anti-IT now...whereas before you were a staucnh supporter...not that it's wrong - but sometimes change takes time to get used to...

Edit: 'd in so many ways...

Estebanus is just angry at ME I think. Much like I would be if the literal version proves true. But it hasn't yet.

[AresKeith]

401 Kill wrote...

estebanus wrote...

Restrider wrote...

I have to say that ME 2 main plot was not the best of the whole tilogy.
Yet, the main plot is not what ME 2 is about.
ME 2 expands the universe vastly and shows us a lot of new places and deepens already known characters and introduces new characters adequately. That's what made ME 2 great.

Exactly. It was character-based, not story-based.

And they plan on removing the greatest charecter of them all in ME4. I don't buy it.

If ME4 comes around and Shepard is not in it, I will say that they have no idea what they are doing, and give up on the Mass Effect series.

I have not given up on them yet.

How so?

[BansheeOwnage]

401 Kill wrote...

And they plan on removing the greatest charecter of them all in ME4. I don't buy it.

If ME4 comes around and Shepard is not in it, I will say that they have no idea what they are doing, and give up on the Mass Effect series.

I have not given up on them yet.

Same here. We'll see what happens in ME4.

@Pax Yeah, now we just need an Act 3 DLC.

[401 Kill]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

paxxton wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

paxxton wrote...

401 Kill wrote...

Oh come on, the majority of the fans who played Mass Effect 3 hated the original endings. They have NOT fixed a single thing, the fact that we are still going on about the endings speaks volumes.

But we talk about it because we see its value.

I didn't discard you because I knew your value.

TIM?

I... tried Paxxton.

Then you have failed humanity.

[Dwailing]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

estebanus wrote...

How can a Macguffin be seen as great writing? A weapon that up until the ending essentially is a long-lost reaper-off button?

EDIT: top. Meh.

Well, I agree that literal is terrible writing. But in IT, it is unknown if the crucible is actually an off button or not. There is ample foreshadowing that it's a trap.

A Macguffin is not always bad. A deus ex machina, if done properly, is not always bad (see Doctor Who). Also, we don't know for certain just WHAT the Crucible does. It might not be the Reaper off switch it seems to be.

[D.Sharrah]

paxxton wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Been doing a playthrough to try and get set-up for Omega...is there a consensus on when "it will fit naturally with the current storyline" ...I was thinking about trying to have everything done up to Sanctuary...

Act 2 is the part Omega DLC should be played in.

Well I just finished the Citadel Coup attempt...but I still have so much time before Omega is released...I guess I could focus on MP...

[estebanus]

D.Sharrah wrote...

estebanus wrote...

BatmanTurian wrote...

estebanus wrote...

401 Kill wrote...

estebanus wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...
Well of course not if it wasn't their intention. If it was, you can bet they care about it a lot. I hope literal is wrong just because synthesis is an appauling crime.

Assuming if they did, of course. However, then they'd have said something wouldn't they?

If it was their intention: Why spoil the surprise? 

If it wasn't, I seriously doubt their ability to write even the simplest of stories. (Unless of course they go with "The Puzzle Theory", they do claim to take ideas from fans right:lol:?

Oh yeah, I can totally see how much they cared about the fans' demands after experiencing the game myself.

Has it ever ocurred to you that both Casey and Walters aren't good writers? I mean, the main storyline (AKA the crucible plot) totally gave that away.

Are you feeling alright, estebanus? You don't sound like your usual self.

How so?

Could be wrong...but I think its that you seem anti-IT now...whereas before you were a staucnh supporter...not that it's wrong - but sometimes change takes time to get used to...

Edit: 'd in so many ways...

I'm not against the IT. I find it to ba an awesome theory, but I don't believe in it anymore.

[paxxton]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

paxxton wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

paxxton wrote...

401 Kill wrote...

Oh come on, the majority of the fans who played Mass Effect 3 hated the original endings. They have NOT fixed a single thing, the fact that we are still going on about the endings speaks volumes.

But we talk about it because we see its value.

I didn't discard you because I knew your value.

TIM?

I... tried Paxxton.

[estebanus]

Dwailing wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

estebanus wrote...

How can a Macguffin be seen as great writing? A weapon that up until the ending essentially is a long-lost reaper-off button?

EDIT: top. Meh.

Well, I agree that literal is terrible writing. But in IT, it is unknown if the crucible is actually an off button or not. There is ample foreshadowing that it's a trap.

A Macguffin is not always bad. A deus ex machina, if done properly, is not always bad (see Doctor Who). Also, we don't know for certain just WHAT the Crucible does. It might not be the Reaper off switch it seems to be.

In order for a macguffin to be good, it must be foreshadowed at least in some way. This didn't happen with the crucible. It got dumped right on our laps, completely outta the blue, right at the game's beginning.

[BansheeOwnage]

401 Kill wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

paxxton wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

paxxton wrote...

401 Kill wrote...

Oh come on, the majority of the fans who played Mass Effect 3 hated the original endings. They have NOT fixed a single thing, the fact that we are still going on about the endings speaks volumes.

But we talk about it because we see its value.

I didn't discard you because I knew your value.

TIM?

I... tried Paxxton.

Then you have failed humanity.

That's not true! I just need to -

[estebanus]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Could be wrong...but I think its that you seem anti-IT now...whereas before you were a staucnh supporter...not that it's wrong - but sometimes change takes time to get used to...

Edit: 'd in so many ways...

Estebanus is just angry at ME I think. Much like I would be if the literal version proves true. But it hasn't yet.

I'm not angry at Mass Effect. I'm just angry in general, right now.

[paxxton]

D.Sharrah wrote...

paxxton wrote...

D.Sharrah wrote...

Been doing a playthrough to try and get set-up for Omega...is there a consensus on when "it will fit naturally with the current storyline" ...I was thinking about trying to have everything done up to Sanctuary...

Act 2 is the part Omega DLC should be played in.

Well I just finished the Citadel Coup attempt...but I still have so much time before Omega is released...I guess I could focus on MP...

That might be a good idea. There's an "operation" currently in effect.

[401 Kill]

AresKeith wrote...

401 Kill wrote...

estebanus wrote...

Restrider wrote...
I have to say that ME 2 main plot was not the best of the whole tilogy.
Yet, the main plot is not what ME 2 is about.
ME 2 expands the universe vastly and shows us a lot of new places and deepens already known characters and introduces new characters adequately. That's what made ME 2 great.

Exactly. It was character-based, not story-based.

And they plan on removing the greatest charecter of them all in ME4. I don't buy it
If ME4 comes around and Shepard is not in it, I will say that they have no idea what they are doing, and give up on the Mass Effect series.
I have not given up on them yet.

How so?

Shepard is the face of Mass Effect. Shepard is the avatar of the player. I could never imagine a Mass Effect without Shepard, it will just sadden me. If they take away Shepard from the player, I don't even want to see it. It will not be a true Mass Effect game, along with the absence of Shepards squad.

[BansheeOwnage]

estebanus wrote...

Dwailing wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

estebanus wrote...

How can a Macguffin be seen as great writing? A weapon that up until the ending essentially is a long-lost reaper-off button?

EDIT: top. Meh.

Well, I agree that literal is terrible writing. But in IT, it is unknown if the crucible is actually an off button or not. There is ample foreshadowing that it's a trap.

A Macguffin is not always bad. A deus ex machina, if done properly, is not always bad (see Doctor Who). Also, we don't know for certain just WHAT the Crucible does. It might not be the Reaper off switch it seems to be.

In order for a macguffin to be good, it must be foreshadowed at least in some way. This didn't happen with the crucible. It got dumped right on our laps, completely outta the blue, right at the game's beginning.

Which would be totally, totally, awesome if it was a reaper trap.

[paxxton]

BansheeOwnage wrote...

401 Kill wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

paxxton wrote...

BansheeOwnage wrote...

paxxton wrote...

401 Kill wrote...

Oh come on, the majority of the fans who played Mass Effect 3 hated the original endings. They have NOT fixed a single thing, the fact that we are still going on about the endings speaks volumes.

But we talk about it because we see its value.

I didn't discard you because I knew your value.

TIM?

I... tried Paxxton.

Then you have failed humanity.

That's not true! I just need to -

"No, I am the savior of humanity. I am the pinnacle of..." *gets a headshot*