419 réponses à ce sujet

[MissMaster_2]

Fiery Phoenix wrote...

Why am I not surprised?

[someguy1231]

"Don't get to attached to a plot"

Then don't get too attached to my money.

[plfranke]

Gruntburner wrote...

@MacNasty

It doesn't matter is she was trying to be offensive. What the OP did was take a quote out of context and present it as if Jessica was referring to the whole plot. All this does is feed to people's "anything Bioware does is awful" mindset, creating a post that would have undoubtedly fueled misinformed arguments against Bioware. This is horribly unproductive to any reasonable discussion.

I did not take it out of context, I don't know why people keep saying this. I gave the entire conversation and it was not as if she said, in this one case and this case only don't get attached to the plot. What I'm doing is trying to find an answer to why Harbinger did not speak in Mass Effect 3. This was the answer I was given. And in response to you saying "as if Jessica was referring to the whole plot." I'm sure I'm not the only one who noticed there are many inconsistencies in the plot, not just the abscence of Harbinger.

[Torrible]

Don't get too fixated on a tweet.

[Reth Shepherd]

I have to agree, that was pretty in-context. The fact that it matches other quotes made pre-release doesn't exactly help Bioware's case.

[chemiclord]

Only when you twist it to mean what you want it to mean so that it's an insult to you.

[Reth Shepherd]

Ok, a little help here, please? The quote I'm thinking of, about the 'who remembers what they did eight years ago' wasn't in the developers quote thread, probably because it was said by the head of the finance department, if I recall correctly. Does anyone remember where it is and would you mind linking, please?

Edit: Oh hi, Chemic! Pleasure to see you as always! (fake customer service smile)

Modifié par Reth Shepherd, 20 août 2012 - 06:40 .

[Gogzilla]

plfranke wrote...

This was Jessica Merizan's response to me when asked why Harbinger was silent in mass effect 3. What does everyone think about this?

"Don't get too attached to a plot"

Plot threads can be placed all over the place when writing a story. We may find them interesting and even like them

But Sometimes not all the plot threads are followed to their natural conclusion in the story.
This happens time and time again in many storys. Eiher due to time contraints or for the sake of the larger story.

[wildannie]

Jessica should really think before tweeting. I play these games to get attached to the plot, it was what I liked about them. If I'd known so many important plot lines were going to be dropped in the final part of the TRILOGY I really wouldn't have bothered ... total waste of my time.

[AmstradHero]

plfranke wrote...

essarr71 wrote...

plfranke wrote...

Cainne Chapel wrote...

Maybe line could be taken out of context?

I'd have to see what the conversation was above as its all to easy to take one simple line and destroy the context that said sentence was placed in.

Care to post the whole thing so i can get a better understanding?

Sure. I can even link it to you if you want. https://twitter.com/...758994482499584
Me: Can you give an answer to why Harbinger never spoke in me3?
Jessica: we know that's what you hoped to see, but sometimes we have other ideas we want to explore - never get too attached to a plot

Aaaand suddenly it's a relevent response.  

I don't really see how what else she said makes it okay. She is talking about the primary antogonist. This isn't just some side plot or one that hadn't been heavily developed. This was a major storyline. For instance, what if mass effect 1 and 2 had been all the same and in the 3rd one the Reapers just suddenly didn't want to harvest humanity, but instead you had to deal with the dark energy problem. Would that be acceptable, because you shouldn't get too attached to a plot?

I have no problem with the general concept of "don't get too attached to a plot." That is an excellent piece of advice for writers while they are working (because sometimes you have to ditch that idea that you love) and for players (because sometimes it really is just a side plot).

However, there are two problems I see with this response.
1) "We know that's what you hoped to see". So you know what the fans wanted but you deliberately chose not to deliver that? I'm not saying that BioWare should cater for every single whim of fans. I don't think any game company should do that. However, an actual conflict with Harbinger would not have been out of place in the context of the rest of the series, and would have been a suitable climax for the game. Heck, it could have even been Harbinger that got taken out on Rannoch and players would have likely found that more satisfying.

2) As pointed out above, Harbinger was effectively the antagonist of the second game. Harbinger was the face that was being given to players as the single focus point of their emnity. To fail to deliver on an antagonist at all, as is the case with Harbinger's effective non-existence in ME3 after having him being set up as an antagonist throughout ME2, is an abject failure of writing. You cannot dump a primary antagonist. It's poor writing for a game because it provides a less focussed experience for the player, and it's poor expectation management for effectively dropping a major idea/character that was rammed down the player's throat throughout an entire game.

I didn't love Harbinger. Sovereign gave more context and menace in one conversation than Harbinger did throughout all of his lines, but Harbinger provided a game and plot handle for players: "I really want to take down the smug Harbinger", a desire that was never satisfied in any way. Even worse, he blasts the player and then just flies off for no reason. A wholly unsatisfying "conclusion" for an enemy cast as a/the primary antagonist.

[Geomon19]

Gogzilla wrote...
This happens time and time again in many storys. Eiher due to time contraints or for the sake of the larger story.

 

Or because the writers suck.

Modifié par Geomon19, 20 août 2012 - 06:56 .

[jtrook]

Ugh...I like her but good lord...Never tell a fan to not be attached to some aspect of a product. It shows they don't care about the audience or customers. Now in honesty we know they are apathetic but the bliss of being delusional about their passion helps with sales. This burst that bubble. It would be a PR nightmare if this went on an official channel

[Goneaviking]

plfranke wrote...

Gruntburner wrote...

@MacNasty

It doesn't matter is she was trying to be offensive. What the OP did was take a quote out of context and present it as if Jessica was referring to the whole plot. All this does is feed to people's "anything Bioware does is awful" mindset, creating a post that would have undoubtedly fueled misinformed arguments against Bioware. This is horribly unproductive to any reasonable discussion.

I did not take it out of context, I don't know why people keep saying this. I gave the entire conversation and it was not as if she said, in this one case and this case only don't get attached to the plot. What I'm doing is trying to find an answer to why Harbinger did not speak in Mass Effect 3. This was the answer I was given. And in response to you saying "as if Jessica was referring to the whole plot." I'm sure I'm not the only one who noticed there are many inconsistencies in the plot, not just the abscence of Harbinger.

Because you initially passed "Don't get too attached to a plot" off as the entire response to being asked a question, when the response was actually "We know that's what you hoped to see, but sometimes we have other ideas we want to explore - never get too attached to a plot."

Your initial post depicted it as flippant and insulting, when we saw it in context it was neither. Her response clearly indicated that it was simply one of the plot threads that wasn't picked up and developed further for whatever reason.

You chose to create a thread that virtually invited people to personally insult the woman because she was foolish enough to respond to your questions in good faith. 

[sydranark]

Wait... I'm more surprised at the fact that people are surprised. The lack of a Harbinger fight is only one problem on the list of things Mac Walters is responsible for.

Also, this has been kind of a recurring theme since March. People address plot holes and things that challenge the lore set in previous games. BioWare responds with the "artistic integrity" card and makes it seem as if the plot is insignificant. Its all about what the writers wanted to do, and not what they should have done.

[Gruntburner]

plfranke wrote...

Gruntburner wrote...

@MacNasty

It doesn't matter is she was trying to be offensive. What the OP did was take a quote out of context and present it as if Jessica was referring to the whole plot. All this does is feed to people's "anything Bioware does is awful" mindset, creating a post that would have undoubtedly fueled misinformed arguments against Bioware. This is horribly unproductive to any reasonable discussion.

I did not take it out of context, I don't know why people keep saying this. I gave the entire conversation and it was not as if she said, in this one case and this case only don't get attached to the plot. What I'm doing is trying to find an answer to why Harbinger did not speak in Mass Effect 3. This was the answer I was given. And in response to you saying "as if Jessica was referring to the whole plot." I'm sure I'm not the only one who noticed there are many inconsistencies in the plot, not just the abscence of Harbinger.

Then I apologize.  But could you please put what she was responding to in the actual OP?  Many of the responses to the post seem to be misunderstanding what Jessica is referring to and spouting hate.  That is what I was hoping we could avoid.

Modifié par Gruntburner, 20 août 2012 - 07:14 .

[plfranke]

Goneaviking wrote...

plfranke wrote...

Gruntburner wrote...

@MacNasty

It doesn't matter is she was trying to be offensive. What the OP did was take a quote out of context and present it as if Jessica was referring to the whole plot. All this does is feed to people's "anything Bioware does is awful" mindset, creating a post that would have undoubtedly fueled misinformed arguments against Bioware. This is horribly unproductive to any reasonable discussion.

I did not take it out of context, I don't know why people keep saying this. I gave the entire conversation and it was not as if she said, in this one case and this case only don't get attached to the plot. What I'm doing is trying to find an answer to why Harbinger did not speak in Mass Effect 3. This was the answer I was given. And in response to you saying "as if Jessica was referring to the whole plot." I'm sure I'm not the only one who noticed there are many inconsistencies in the plot, not just the abscence of Harbinger.

Because you initially passed "Don't get too attached to a plot" off as the entire response to being asked a question, when the response was actually "We know that's what you hoped to see, but sometimes we have other ideas we want to explore - never get too attached to a plot."

Your initial post depicted it as flippant and insulting, when we saw it in context it was neither. Her response clearly indicated that it was simply one of the plot threads that wasn't picked up and developed further for whatever reason.

You chose to create a thread that virtually invited people to personally insult the woman because she was foolish enough to respond to your questions in good faith. 

It was not at all my intention to make her response seem insulting, I was trying to show people Bioware's stance on the issue. To me, the first part of her statement makes it even worst, because she's saying, we know what you wanted but we wanted this so don't get too attached to a plot. However, since a couple of people have requested it, and I really don't mind people seeing the full conversation I'll put it up. I was just trying to get to the point, which is that Bioware ignored an existing plot line in favor of doing something they wanted.

[TheSovietPenguin]

The phrase "don't get too attached to a plot" should not exist in a mass effect discussion since that's exactly what we did for 2 games. Wrong answer Jess, Try again.

[Goneaviking]

[quote]AmstradHero wrote...
I have no problem with the general concept of "don't get too attached to a plot." That is an excellent piece of advice for writers while they are working (because sometimes you have to ditch that idea that you love) and for players (because sometimes it really is just a side plot).

However, there are two problems I see with this response.
1) "We know that's what you hoped to see". So you know what the fans wanted but you deliberately chose not to deliver that? I'm not saying that BioWare should cater for every single whim of fans. I don't think any game company should do that. However, an actual conflict with Harbinger would not have been out of place in the context of the rest of the series, and would have been a suitable climax for the game. Heck, it could have even been Harbinger that got taken out on Rannoch and players would have likely found that more satisfying.[/quote]
Hindsight is a pain. The whole time I was visiting BSN before ME3, pretty regularly since joining up, every time anyone said anything about Harbinger its name was met with a mass of scorn and contempt. Indicating after the fact that they "know that's what you hoped to see" is rather different than "knew what you hoped to see".

[/quote]2) As pointed out above, Harbinger was effectively the antagonist of the second game. Harbinger was the face that was being given to players as the single focus point of their emnity. To fail to deliver on an antagonist at all, as is the case with Harbinger's effective non-existence in ME3 after having him being set up as an antagonist throughout ME2, is an abject failure of writing. You cannot dump a primary antagonist. It's poor writing for a game because it provides a less focussed experience for the player, and it's poor expectation management for effectively dropping a major idea/character that was rammed down the player's throat throughout an entire game.[/quote]

Harbinger was point man for reapers, but he never really seemed liked a major antagonist, as opposed to The Illusive Man who spent the entire game trying to exert dominance over Shepard: placing him into Cerberus' debt, alienating him from his friends and allies, lying to him and withholding important information.

Having one enemy in your sights doesn't mean you don't have a more dangerous one at your back.

Which of us is right in their assessment is probably subjective, but TIM certainly fulfilled the role of antagonist come ME3.

[quote]I didn't love Harbinger. Sovereign gave more context and menace in one conversation than Harbinger did throughout all of his lines, but Harbinger provided a game and plot handle for players: "I really want to take down the smug Harbinger", a desire that was never satisfied in any way. Even worse, he blasts the player and then just flies off for no reason. A wholly unsatisfying "conclusion" for an enemy cast as a/the primary antagonist.
[/quote]

I actually did love Harbinger. He regarded Shepard as a valuable specimen and enjoyed trolling him while playing with him via the Collectors, seemed like the Cthulhu equivalent of a kid a microscope and a jar full of grasshoppers. For all his apparent goofiness he was consistently competent in resource management - his first outing was a successful ambush that killed Shepard and very nearly got his speciment home for dissection, after that it's one contingency plan after another.

In part 3 we can infer Harbinger's influence but never really see it. He's not chasing Shepard to fulfill some grudge over the Collector Base or the Alpha Relay like some petty juvenile, but he has apparently been talking to his friends about the worthy gamesmanship of his pet human. In London it's doubtful he even recognises Shepard, but if he does he's got a job to do, thwacks him down and leaves silently - absolutely appropriate for someone that regards himself as so far above us.

Meanwhile we do get a long awaited direct confrontation with the Illusive Man. After trying to control us all over ME2, and to thwart us all of ME3 he finally gets his. Which was damned satisfying for someone who had always regarded him as the true villain of part 2.

[plfranke]

It's doubtful he recognized Shepard? He was dogging him the entire second game. He was obsessed with him, and the Harbinger we grew to love in the second game would have never just flown off without saying a word.

[Goneaviking]

plfranke wrote...

It was not at all my intention to make her response seem insulting, I was trying to show people Bioware's stance on the issue. To me, the first part of her statement makes it even worst, because she's saying, we know what you wanted but we wanted this so don't get too attached to a plot. However, since a couple of people have requested it, and I really don't mind people seeing the full conversation I'll put it up. I was just trying to get to the point, which is that Bioware ignored an existing plot line in favor of doing something they wanted.

That's fair enough, but given the nature of BSN over the last few months it was predictable that it would quickly devolve to personal insults directed at her.

It is however the prerogative of the developers to make the game they wanted. The actual quote you posted indicated they realize people wanted it now, but from the little I've seen it hasn't been proven that they believed prior to release that there was a demand for more Harbinger.

[Goneaviking]

plfranke wrote...

It's doubtful he recognized Shepard? He was dogging him the entire second game. He was obsessed with him, and the Harbinger we grew to love in the second game would have never just flown off without saying a word.

Shepard was one of many running figures in the dark. Likely wearing different armour to what he was sporting in the previous game, while Harbinger was standing high above us zapping people who were in a hustle to get past him.

[Eterna]

She just said you shouldn't get too attached to all concepts in a story like Mass Effect because they can abandoned later on in the plot to explore more diverse things.

[Epic777]

^^ But if too many concepts are abandoned and newer concepts simply take their place aren't you leading towards a disjointed experience?

[Jadebaby]

I just had a thought in regards to this..

Maybe she was saying "don't get too attached to pot."

Because that would be much better advice.

Modifié par Jade8aby88, 20 août 2012 - 08:23 .