230 réponses à ce sujet

[Tipsyfresh]

Dislike

[Jonata]

sheppard7 wrote...

OP said he's a very professional critic who calls himself Hulk? LOL. OP is this Hulk guy obviously and trying to get some free publicity on BSN.

Mwahahah it would be so awesome if I actually was my favourite film crit! 

[D24O]

Jonata wrote...

sheppard7 wrote...

OP said he's a very professional critic who calls himself Hulk? LOL. OP is this Hulk guy obviously and trying to get some free publicity on BSN.

Mwahahah it would be so awesome if I actually was my favourite film crit! 

Accually that would be pretty funny if it were the case. I'd probably get a few lols.

[ShepnTali]

It's not easy defending the endings with a straight face. This schtick makes sense.

[Jonata]

ShepnTali wrote...

It's not easy defending the endings with a straight face. This schtick makes sense.

I can assure you he was using this "schtick" long before Mass Effect 3 was even announced.

[Jorji Costava]

Just going to upchuck some thoughts here:

First, let's get over the all-caps thing. Film Crit Hulk usually writes good stuff, and the all-caps thing is just part of his schtick. It's no different than Mike Stoklasa using that drunken Plinkett voice in the Red Letter Media reviews; it doesn't mean they're dumb, or shouldn't be taken seriously. It's just their style. They want to counterpose the style of their work, which superficially seems dumb, with the substance of the points they're making, which are generally quite good.

Having said that, I'm going to take the opportunity to take issue with a few points in his previous article, where he really makes the main points he wants to make about ME. I could take issue with all of it, but that post would be way too long.

I'm pretty convinced that Film Crit HULK went into the ending having already made up his mind: He was going to enjoy it because the thought that the unwashed masses might be right, and that the artist might be wrong, was simply something he couldn't stomach. If the internet thinks X, then X must be wrong.

Most of the article is surprising non-specific about the nature of the ending itself. I see little to the idea that the ending resolves the central theme of 'cycles': What was the ending going to be about, other than ending the cycle of Reaper invasions? And what about those three awful choices in particular resolves that theme in a way that is more meaningful than would have been accomplished by alternative ways of ending the reaper threat? To my eyes at least, this argument of Hulk's seems few steps above mere punning on the word 'cycles.'

"SO WHAT DOES MASS EFFECT ULTIMATELY HAVE TO SAY? HULK KEEPS HEARING THAT MASS EFFECT IS ABOUT CHOICE. IT ISN'T ABOUT CHOICE WHATSOEVER; CHOICE WAS SIMPLY THE NATURE OF THE MECHANICS."

The idea that ME isn't about choice is just implausible. The game includes any number of plot contrivances that exist precisely for the purpose of enabling player agency. Consider Rannoch: If the Geth have the reaper code, they win, and if they don't, they lose. This scenario is pretty contrived and the sole reason it exists is to enable Shepard to single-handedly determine who wins the Geth-Quarian war. That sounds an awful lot like something you might do if you wanted to make a game about choices. How about the choice to awaken or not awaken Grunt, or to activate Legion? Not awakening either of them has no discernible effect except to give you a couple more credits and cut you off from a lot of content. There's no reason, in story terms, to even allow the choice, except that the developers thought that enabling choice was in itself valuable.

EDIT: Fixed a paragraph.

Modifié par osbornep, 18 août 2012 - 01:58 .

[zambot]

I like Hulk. I think he's wrong, but I still like him.

[Deltateam Elcor]

osbornep wrote...

Just going to upchuck some thoughts here:

First, let's get over the all-caps thing. Film Crit Hulk usually writes good stuff, and the all-caps thing is just part of his schtick. It's no different than Mike Stoklasa using that drunken Plinkett voice in the Red Letter Media reviews; it doesn't mean they're dumb, or shouldn't be taken seriously. It's just their style. They want to counterpose the style of their work, which superficially seems dumb, with the substance of the points they're making, which are generally quite good.

Having said that, I'm going to take the opportunity to take issue with a few points in his previous article, where he really makes the main points he wants to make about ME. I could take issue with all of it, but that post would be way too long.

I'm pretty convinced that Film Crit HULK went into the ending having already made up his mind: He was going to enjoy it because the thought that the unwashed masses might be right, and that the artist might be wrong, was simply something he couldn't stomach. If the internet thinks X, then X must be wrong.

Most of the article is surprising non-specific about the nature of the ending itself. I see little to the idea that the ending resolves the central theme of 'cycles': What was the ending going to be about, other than ending the cycle of Reaper invasions? And what about those three awful choices in particular resolves that theme in a way that is more meaningful than would have been accomplished by alternative ways of ending the reaper threat? To my eyes at least, this argument of Hulk's seems few steps above mere punning on the word 'cycles.'

"SO WHAT DOES MASS EFFECT ULTIMATELY HAVE TO SAY? HULK KEEPS HEARING THAT MASS EFFECT IS ABOUT CHOICE. IT ISN'T ABOUT CHOICE WHATSOEVER; CHOICE WAS SIMPLY THE NATURE OF THE MECHANICS."

The idea that ME isn't about choice is just implausible. The game includes any number of plot contrivances that exist precisely for the purpose of enabling player agency. Consider Rannoch: If the Geth have the reaper code, they win, and if they don't, they lose. This scenario is pretty contrived and the sole reason it exists is to enable Shepard to single-handedly determine who wins the Geth-Quarian war. That sounds an awful lot like something you might do if you wanted to make a game about choices. How about the choice to awaken or not awaken Grunt, or to activate Legion? Not awakening either of them has no discernible effect except to give you a couple more credits and cut you off from a lot of content. There's no reason, in story terms, to even allow the choice, except that the developers thought that enabling choice was in itself valuable.

EDIT: Fixed a paragraph.

Why are you defending the words of another guy?

Have you lost ALL purpose in life? 

[Jonata]

osbornep, your analysis is right now the single most logical thing I've read so far in this thread.

[Iakus]

Hulk, with all due respect

Death is not beautiful.

Live heroes>dead martyrs

[MystEU]

I like the kind of polarizing bitter remarks from those people who can't take anything from a story, thematically. I guess a few freshman and sophomore college English classes don't cut it.

Great read from Hulk as always. I don't agree 100% but it was a good read. However, no reason to debate it here because of see above reason.

Modifié par MystEU, 18 août 2012 - 03:09 .

[Scorpion1O1]

Thanks for sharing OP.

[Obadiah]

Another great article!

[Yalision]

Hulk simply has awful taste in narrative, which is fine. I'm happy and he doesn't have to play the extended cut if he likes his ending just like it is. The world goes on and Bioware keeps my business.

[SpamBot2000]

Yes, as I was saying to Lady Ascot-Hohenzollern at dear Rupert's coronation gala, these beastly peasants with their vulgar ideas above their station really do require a proper ****ing, preferably right in the visage. 

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 18 août 2012 - 07:48 .

[FlamingBoy]

at least his defense is not totally garbage like ign and his original columns, but it still a bit weak in places

it essentially just a giant apology

[geceka]

Torrible wrote...

It is a thoughtful and heartfelt piece of writing. Love the calm and rational discussion in the comments section as well. You can definitely tell the kind of readers this guy attracts. I'm definitely a fan now.

exactly, his second piece is not so much about the endings per se anymore (he handled those in his original post), but about the discussion. that's the saddest thing about them, actually, that the discussion is pretty much "I hate the endings, and you suck" vs. "I like the endings, and you suck".

look guys, is it so hard to accept that some people just *like* the way in which their Shepard(s) break an extinction cycle that has not only been going on for billions (!) of years, but has also shaped *everything* you encounter in the Mass Effect universe? Not only breaking it, but through different choices, which in turn reflect lots of other choices made throughout the game? Have you, as an example, tried choosing "control" with a Renegade and a Paragon Shep? Totally different undertones (I wonder how a Renegade Shep controlling the Reapers would react to Wreav starting another Krogan war with the genophade cured, as an example).

there certainly are *many* things that could have been better about the endings and ME3 in general. really, many things, but there's a huge spectrum between things being "awesome" or "crap". a discussion is supposed to happen within this spectrum, not only at the extremes. And it should focus on the story itself, not the people writing it or discussing it. That's what Hulk is talking about in the second piece, simply admitting that on one hand, he made a big mistake by singling out a guy with a YouTube video and equating everyone having thoughts about the endings with that guy's whiny, entitled, pretty much childish attitude, and on the other hand, also addressing how this behavior is symptomatic of the entire discussion emanating from (some) anti-enders (whose line of thinking is "if you like the endings, you must be an EA shill/idiot/elitist hipster/...").

and one more thing about "logic in storytelling": you're taking Hulk's line about that totally out of context. He didn't claim that logic isn't important in storytelling, he only said that it's typical for people disliking a story to nitpick about details, akin to that annoying kid in the cinema yelling "uuuunrealistic" all the time.

in the end, just relax for a bit, enjoy ME3 for what it is (and sorry, it's really not a bad game, neither gameplay-, nor story-wise), and look forward to what sorts of twists and extensions DLC will bring, and what ME4 (or whatever) will add to the saga. you're only ruining it for yourself by being an ending hardliner at this point, and if you miss your LI or whatever, there's billions of fanfic out there...

[SpamBot2000]

geceka wrote...

look guys, is it so hard to accept that some people just *like* the way in which their Shepard(s) break an extinction cycle that has not only been going on for billions (!) of years, but has also shaped *everything* you encounter in the Mass Effect universe?

No, what's hard to accept is that there is no satisfactory ending as I see it available to me and those who feel as I do. What is hard to accept is the extinction cycle that shapes everything I encounter in the Mass Effect universe suddenly being based on asinine stoner epiphanies. And what is hard to accept is the fascist viciousness of certain reflexive corporate apologists.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 18 août 2012 - 01:32 .

[jules_vern18]

Why are we getting so many updates on this obscure writer? OP, be honest...are *you* HULK Critic?

[geceka]

SpamBot2000 wrote...

No, what's hard to accept is that there is no satisfactory ending as I see it available to me and those who feel as I do.

I understand that, and Hulk addresses this in his piece, too. Yet you not being satisfied with the ending doesn't make it objectively bad, and that's the whole point.

SpamBot2000 wrote...
What is hard to accept is the extinction cycle that shapes everything I encounter in the Mass Effect universe suddenly being based on asinine stoner epiphanies.

Again, fine. It just means you place more importance on getting reasons behind the cycle explained in detail – maybe with statistics from billions of years of observations – than others, or you take the Geth/Quarian peace (possibility) and EDI being somewhat of a nice person as exemplary to invalidate the Catalyst's reasons, whereas to others, that's just anecdotal or connected to Shepard being such an exceptional person that they bring out the best in everyone, but without them, who knows what would have happened. Mind you, without Shepard, there would also be no breaking the cycle this time around anyway.

SpamBot2000 wrote...
And what is hard to accept is the fascist viciousness of certain reflexive corporate apologists.

I don't really get that one, since a TV-show like ending that just does away with the Reapers, but leaves everything else exactly as it was before, would be much more "coporation"-y to my mind, where they could go ahead and push out sequel after sequel as if nothing ever happened.

[SpamBot2000]

geceka wrote...

SpamBot2000 wrote...
And what is hard to accept is the fascist viciousness of certain reflexive corporate apologists.

I don't really get that one, since a TV-show like ending that just does away with the Reapers, but leaves everything else exactly as it was before, would be much more "coporation"-y to my mind, where they could go ahead and push out sequel after sequel as if nothing ever happened.

That has nothing to do with the substance of the endings and everything to do with the way many people absolutely revel in taking the side of EA against any and all complaints because that is the side of real power. This also happens to be the principal emotional appeal of fascist politics.

As for pushing out sequel after sequel, are BioWare not capable of just not going down that road without sabotaging the viability of the whole setting? In any case, it seems to me BioWare/EA are very much determined to push out just about any ME material except any sequels, which would represent the high end of their range of ME products from a creative standpoint. So there's no "artistic integrity" argument to be made there. Simply a decision to concentrate on milking the franchise with lesser creations.

[geceka]

SpamBot2000 wrote...
That has nothing to do with the substance of the endings and everything to do with the way many people absolutely revel in taking the side of EA against any and all complaints because that is the side of real power. This also happens to be the principal emotional appeal of fascist politics.

How is "here's an interpretation that I think makes the endings beautiful, and if you disagree, that's perfectly fine, let's discuss" fascist? Remember, he actually wrote the second piece to apologize for being a bit too absolute in his first one. Also, talking about fascism here is a bit over the top, don't you think?

SpamBot2000 wrote...
As for pushing out sequel after sequel, are BioWare not capable of just not going down that road without sabotaging the viability of the whole setting? In any case, it seems to me BioWare/EA are very much determined to push out just about any ME material except any sequels, which would represent the high end of their range of ME products from a creative standpoint. So there's no "artistic integrity" argument to be made there. Simply a decision to concentrate on milking the franchise with lesser creations.

True, we'll see how that goes. Nevertheless, I think a trival action-movie ending + "Buy ME4, the continuation to Shepard's story" would have been easier for them to sell than "Buy ME4, the unimportant side-story to ME3", so regarding a purely business-driven sense, a different ME3 ending would have been preferable for EA. 

[Blueprotoss]

MystEU wrote...

I like the kind of polarizing bitter remarks from those people who can't take anything from a story, thematically. I guess a few freshman and sophomore college English classes don't cut it.

Great read from Hulk as always. I don't agree 100% but it was a good read. However, no reason to debate it here because of see above reason.

Sadly this is why we can't have nice things based on offical forums because the few resorting to the extreme yet bitter polarization.

Yalision wrote...

Hulk simply has awful taste in narrative, which is fine. I'm happy and he doesn't have to play the extended cut if he likes his ending just like it is. The world goes on and Bioware keeps my business.

How is that why he's not biased or overreacting like the normal Hulk, which is what some of the "fans" did when they unneccessarily flipped the table. 

FlamingBoy wrote...

at least his defense is not totally garbage like ign and his original columns, but it still a bit weak in places

it essentially just a giant apology

How is IGN in the wrong when they treated ME3 just like they did with each version of ME1 and ME2.  Personally you either disagree or agree with reviews whileif you're upset with the ME3 reviews then you should also be upset with the ME1 and ME2 so there is some consistancey.

jules_vern18 wrote...

Why are we getting so many updates on this obscure writer? OP, be honest...are *you* HULK Critic?

The same could be said about Angry Joe while everyone has their picks. 

Modifié par Blueprotoss, 18 août 2012 - 04:47 .

[SpamBot2000]

geceka wrote...

How is "here's an interpretation that I think makes the endings beautiful, and if you disagree, that's perfectly fine, let's discuss" fascist? Remember, he actually wrote the second piece to apologize for being a bit too absolute in his first one. Also, talking about fascism here is a bit over the top, don't you think?

Uh, you didn't see the rant about "****ING THEM ALL IN THE FACE!!!!" in his "thoughtful" review? Pretty nasty fantasy to indulge in for a supposedly disinterested critic. And I'm talking about many more people than just the Hulk fellow, with their ideas of BioWare making a game with "haters" that you could "shoot in the face with a shotgun". And no, talking about the basic emotional mechanisms of fascism in our attitudes towards things is not over the top. That ugly appeal touches places inside us, and it's only right that we take the time out of our rants now and then to recognize it for what it is.

Modifié par SpamBot2000, 18 août 2012 - 04:58 .

[m2iCodeJockey]

Hulk wrote...
...HULK DIDN'T FIND THE MOMENT TO BE DEUS EX MACHINA BECAUSE WE WERE QUITE LITERALLY SEARCHING FOR THE CATALYST FIGURE FOR THE ENTIRE GAME...

That was not correct.
ME1 "Stop Saren from launching a Reaper invasion"
ME2 "Stop the Collectors from collecting humans"
ME3 "Assemble a space army and Doom's Day Device to challenge the Reaper invasion"

At no time was I looking for a 3 1/2 foot tall avatar of an AI suffering from a recursion fault...