161 réponses à ce sujet

[dreman9999]

 
Don’t introduce any new characters or subplots. 

ME1 did this with Virgil.

Don’t describe, muse, explain or philosophize. 

The catalyst did not do this.

Do Afford redemption to your heroic character.

Do you know that Ender's Game end with the character Affording redemption ?
Do Tie up loose ends of significance. (Post EC is up for debate, but Pre EC this was definitely not accomplished)

Post ec tied up everthing.

Don’t change voice, tone or attitude. 

The tone did not change. ME 1 you find out your facing a race of advance synthetics. The ending did not counter that at all.
It was alway organic/synthetic issues.

Modifié par dreman9999, 18 septembre 2012 - 04:42 .

[Kel Riever]

The ending(s) are so atrocious, that (predictibly) critics have even begun to tear apart the good things, the okay things, and the things we wouldn't have worried about otherwise. That's why you don't screw up your endings, mmkay?

Lack of choice is the priority problem (no, the EC doesn't make you have a choice, it embellishes on the bad reasons you have no choice). THEN, and AFTER that, nothing makes sense because of faux starchild logic.

[Ithurael]

dreman9999 wrote...

 
Don’t introduce any new characters or subplots. 

ME1 did this with Virgil.

Don’t describe, muse, explain or philosophize. 

The catalyst did not do this.

ME1 did this at the end of the game during the battle of the citadel? This is the do's and don'ts of writing an ENDING.
Illos is near the end, Citadel IS the end.

And yes, the catatlyst did nothing but explaine, muse, philosophize and was a massive backstory dump at the last minute.

[dreman9999]

Kel Riever wrote...

The ending(s) are so atrocious, that (predictibly) critics have even begun to tear apart the good things, the okay things, and the things we wouldn't have worried about otherwise. That's why you don't screw up your endings, mmkay?

Lack of choice is the priority problem (no, the EC doesn't make you have a choice, it embellishes on the bad reasons you have no choice). THEN, and AFTER that, nothing makes sense because of faux starchild logic.

1. The logic of the star child is of a AI lock doing what it's programed to do.
2. What it beleves has no ground to you choice or what you belevie in the end. You can choose to ignore what he states at the end.

3. The catalyst has no control over what the crucible does at the end of the game outside os synthesi. What locks you into the choices is the crucible not the catalyst. The catalyst is just telling you what it does.

4.You do have choice the problem here is that none of the choices you are want to do...Which is the point. The entireperpose of the choices is to bring the player to moral conflict over the choices at a hand. This series has done this many times in ME1, 2 and 3.

[Hexley UK]

satunnainen wrote...

Oh great, the universities have started and every prospective creative writer rushes here after first few lessons to have a go at Bioware writers. I guess the other 289 variations of this same thread have been deleted so you thought you need to start a new one.

It deserves to be said at least 290 times......and more.

[dreman9999]

Ithurael wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

 
Don’t introduce any new characters or subplots. 

ME1 did this with Virgil.

Don’t describe, muse, explain or philosophize. 

The catalyst did not do this.

ME1 did this at the end of the game during the battle of the citadel? This is the do's and don'ts of writing an ENDING.
Illos is near the end, Citadel IS the end.

And yes, the catatlyst did nothing but explaine, muse, philosophize and was a massive backstory dump at the last minute.

The portion when Virgil poped up is at the end and climax of the story. It part of the ending. It may not be the very end but it is part ofthe ending. That still means virgil did what the catalyst did.
And no the catalyst did not phylosophize in any way. It explained what the reapers are and perpose. Just like Virgil did with the protheans in ME1.
The catalyst is just the voice box of the reapers. Nothing more. Just like Virgil is the voice box of the protheans in ME1.

[Hexley UK]

dreman9999 wrote...

 
Don’t introduce any new characters or subplots. 

ME1 did this with Virgil.

Don’t describe, muse, explain or philosophize. 

The catalyst did not do this.

Do Afford redemption to your heroic character.

Do you know that Ender's Game end with the character Affording redemption ?
Do Tie up loose ends of significance. (Post EC is up for debate, but Pre EC this was definitely not accomplished)

Post ec tied up everthing.

Don’t change voice, tone or attitude. 

The tone did not change. ME 1 you find out your facing a race of advance synthetics. The ending did not counter that at all.
It was alway organic/synthetic issues.

Your pointing out that ME1 did things is irrelevant as it was not the end of the story, merely an end to a chapter of said story.

If and when they bring out ME4 which follows the story on directly you can pull this crap up otherwise.....

Modifié par Hexley UK, 18 septembre 2012 - 05:04 .

[dreman9999]

Hexley UK wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

 
Don’t introduce any new characters or subplots. 

ME1 did this with Virgil.

Don’t describe, muse, explain or philosophize. 

The catalyst did not do this.

Do Afford redemption to your heroic character.

Do you know that Ender's Game end with the character Affording redemption ?
Do Tie up loose ends of significance. (Post EC is up for debate, but Pre EC this was definitely not accomplished)

Post ec tied up everthing.

Don’t change voice, tone or attitude. 

The tone did not change. ME 1 you find out your facing a race of advance synthetics. The ending did not counter that at all.
It was alway organic/synthetic issues.

Your pointing out that ME1 did things is irrelevant as it was not the end of the story, merely an end to a chapter of said story.

The fact that it did it at the end of it story makes it relivent. It matters not if its the first part of the story.  The concepts of a story still is inheld with in it. If it can be veiwed on it own, is still has the fallow the concepts of a story.

[Hexley UK]

dreman9999 wrote...

Hexley UK wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

 
Don’t introduce any new characters or subplots. 

ME1 did this with Virgil.

Don’t describe, muse, explain or philosophize. 

The catalyst did not do this.

Do Afford redemption to your heroic character.

Do you know that Ender's Game end with the character Affording redemption ?
Do Tie up loose ends of significance. (Post EC is up for debate, but Pre EC this was definitely not accomplished)

Post ec tied up everthing.

Don’t change voice, tone or attitude. 

The tone did not change. ME 1 you find out your facing a race of advance synthetics. The ending did not counter that at all.
It was alway organic/synthetic issues.

Your pointing out that ME1 did things is irrelevant as it was not the end of the story, merely an end to a chapter of said story.

The fact that it did it at the end of it story makes it relivent. It matters not if its the first part of the story.  The concepts of a story still is inheld with in it. If it can be veiwed on it own, is still has the fallow the concepts of a story.

No the rules of a trilogy or series are different, see things have different rules depending on the facts.

ME1 was always meant to be the first in a continuing story culminating at a later date therefore not a complete story in and of itself.

Modifié par Hexley UK, 18 septembre 2012 - 05:10 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

dreman9999 wrote...

The portion when Virgil poped up is at the end and climax of the story. It part of the ending. It may not be the very end but it is part ofthe ending. That still means virgil did what the catalyst did.
And no the catalyst did not phylosophize in any way. It explained what the reapers are and perpose. Just like Virgil did with the protheans in ME1.
The catalyst is just the voice box of the reapers. Nothing more. Just like Virgil is the voice box of the protheans in ME1.

He appeared near the end of the build up to the actual climax, which was the fight against Saren and Sovereign. He was the equivalent of Anderson in ME3 telling you how the plan of attack was going to go down and what you needed to do. ME2 did the same thing after the Normandy crashlanded at the collector base. There was still a good half hour of game play to go before the conclusion of either ME1 or ME2 catalyst pops up literally in the last scene before the resolution. Catalyst is more than a voice box, he is the one responsible for what is happening and what is going to happen.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

dreman9999 wrote...

4.You do have choice the problem here is that none of the choices you are want to do...Which is the point. The entireperpose of the choices is to bring the player to moral conflict over the choices at a hand. This series has done this many times in ME1, 2 and 3.

Yeah, except moral conflict and stupid conflict are not necessarily related. Most other hard decisions presented in Mass Effect have an appropriate build-up or back story to their direction. Ashley vs. Kaidan? You're given an opportunity to get to know/interact with both characters. Kill Wrex? You're given an opportunity to hear the Krogan history and help him with his family quest. Save/murder the Council? Deals with the build-up of tensions between the Alliance/Council inherent to the setting. Ad infinitum. The ending is the only sequence which introduces radically new ideologies into the equation and expects the player to respond to it.

Providing not even the minimum required exposition in explaining the Synthetic-Organic conflict in the last five minutes of the story and saying to the player "quick, make a choice!" does not make for good story-telling. But then, even with the EC, the Catalyst conversation is a lesson on how not to handle exposition. The Catalyst is not concerned with really making Shepard understand the implications of this conflict, but for some dumb reason recognizes that it is Shepard who will be the one to decide the fate of the galaxy.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 18 septembre 2012 - 05:13 .

[Kel Riever]

All smudboy's video needed to really review was the part about not introducing new (and particularly awful) characters at the end that change your plot. I particuarly like the reference to when Sovereign speaks to you in ME1. It shows you how ill concieved any understanding of the enemy from ME1 is, and how absolutely stupid the logic put forth in the ending is. "Whoops."

Modifié par Kel Riever, 18 septembre 2012 - 05:15 .

[Hexley UK]

Kel Riever wrote...

All that video needed to really review was the part about not introducing new (and particularly awful) characters at the end that change your plot. I particuarly like the reference to when Sovereign speaks to you in ME1. It shows you how ill concieved any understanding of the enemy from ME1 is, and how absolutely stupid the logic put forth in the ending is. "Whoops."

Agreed it does but frankly that was not needed for any of us without some weird BiowEAre butt kissing agenda or half a brain.

[Kel Riever]

Hexley UK wrote...

Kel Riever wrote...

All that video needed to really review was the part about not introducing new (and particularly awful) characters at the end that change your plot. I particuarly like the reference to when Sovereign speaks to you in ME1. It shows you how ill concieved any understanding of the enemy from ME1 is, and how absolutely stupid the logic put forth in the ending is. "Whoops."

Agreed it does but frankly that was not needed for any of us without some weird BiowEAre butt kissing agenda or half a brain.

Yes, yes.  Well, see, I didn't mention that because I have my nice days, too.

[Applepie_Svk]

Dreman´s logic attacking another thread

dreman9999 wrote...


ME1 did this with Virgil.


The catalyst did not do this.

Do Tie up loose ends of significance. (Post EC is up for debate, but Pre EC this was definitely not accomplished)

Post ec tied up everthing.

Vigil was near the end of game - in the other words comparable to timeline of Cronos Station chat wíth Vendetta

Catalyst did this in pretty obvious way

Pre-EC full cliffhanger Post-EC destroy cliffhanger

Post EC just tried to explain mess with more mess...

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 18 septembre 2012 - 05:20 .

[dreman9999]

Greylycantrope wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

The portion when Virgil poped up is at the end and climax of the story. It part of the ending. It may not be the very end but it is part ofthe ending. That still means virgil did what the catalyst did.
And no the catalyst did not phylosophize in any way. It explained what the reapers are and perpose. Just like Virgil did with the protheans in ME1.
The catalyst is just the voice box of the reapers. Nothing more. Just like Virgil is the voice box of the protheans in ME1.

He appeared near the end of the build up to the actual climax, which was the fight against Saren and Sovereign. He was the equivalent of Anderson in ME3 telling you how the plan of attack was going to go down and what you needed to do. ME2 did the same thing after the Normandy crashlanded at the collector base. There was still a good half hour of game play to go before the conclusion of either ME1 or ME2 catalyst pops up literally in the last scene before the resolution. Catalyst is more than a voice box, he is the one responsible for what is happening and what is going to happen.

Everything on Illos is part of the climax. It part of the end.

Yes the catalyst is responsible for all the conflict in the story but it is still a voice box in the end. It does nothing more but explain the reapers and what the crucible does. That defines a voice box.

[Hexley UK]

dreman9999 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

The portion when Virgil poped up is at the end and climax of the story. It part of the ending. It may not be the very end but it is part ofthe ending. That still means virgil did what the catalyst did.
And no the catalyst did not phylosophize in any way. It explained what the reapers are and perpose. Just like Virgil did with the protheans in ME1.
The catalyst is just the voice box of the reapers. Nothing more. Just like Virgil is the voice box of the protheans in ME1.

He appeared near the end of the build up to the actual climax, which was the fight against Saren and Sovereign. He was the equivalent of Anderson in ME3 telling you how the plan of attack was going to go down and what you needed to do. ME2 did the same thing after the Normandy crashlanded at the collector base. There was still a good half hour of game play to go before the conclusion of either ME1 or ME2 catalyst pops up literally in the last scene before the resolution. Catalyst is more than a voice box, he is the one responsible for what is happening and what is going to happen.

Everything on Illos is part of the climax. It part of the end.

Yes the catalyst is responsible for all the conflict in the story but it is still a voice box in the end. It does nothing more but explain the reapers and what the crucible does. That defines a voice box.

The end of a chapter in a 3 chapter story.

[dreman9999]

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Dreman´s logic attacking another thread

dreman9999 wrote...


ME1 did this with Virgil.


The catalyst did not do this.

Do Tie up loose ends of significance. (Post EC is up for debate, but Pre EC this was definitely not accomplished)

Post ec tied up everthing.

Vigil was near the end of game - in the other words comparable to timeline of Cronos Station chat wíth Vendetta

Catalyst did this in pretty obvious way

Pre-EC full cliffhanger Post-EC destroy cliffhanger

Post EC just tried to explain mess with more mess...

Illos is part of the end not before the end.
Post-ec give a clear expliantion. Most who just say it a mess just don't try to understand it.  You just tune out once the catalyst pops out.

[CronoDragoon]

Hexley UK wrote...

The end of a chapter in a 3 chapter story.

With each chapter being relatively self-contained stories. Vigil never pops up again. He's a new character introduced at the end of a story for exposition purposes and to give Shepard and co. a bit of a Deus Ex Machina to beat Sovereign.

[dreman9999]

Hexley UK wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Greylycantrope wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

The portion when Virgil poped up is at the end and climax of the story. It part of the ending. It may not be the very end but it is part ofthe ending. That still means virgil did what the catalyst did.
And no the catalyst did not phylosophize in any way. It explained what the reapers are and perpose. Just like Virgil did with the protheans in ME1.
The catalyst is just the voice box of the reapers. Nothing more. Just like Virgil is the voice box of the protheans in ME1.

He appeared near the end of the build up to the actual climax, which was the fight against Saren and Sovereign. He was the equivalent of Anderson in ME3 telling you how the plan of attack was going to go down and what you needed to do. ME2 did the same thing after the Normandy crashlanded at the collector base. There was still a good half hour of game play to go before the conclusion of either ME1 or ME2 catalyst pops up literally in the last scene before the resolution. Catalyst is more than a voice box, he is the one responsible for what is happening and what is going to happen.

Everything on Illos is part of the climax. It part of the end.

Yes the catalyst is responsible for all the conflict in the story but it is still a voice box in the end. It does nothing more but explain the reapers and what the crucible does. That defines a voice box.

The end of a chapter in a 3 chapter story.

More like 3 divided books. ME is no where near 3 chapters.

[Hexley UK]

dreman9999 wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Dreman´s logic attacking another thread

dreman9999 wrote...


ME1 did this with Virgil.


The catalyst did not do this.

Do Tie up loose ends of significance. (Post EC is up for debate, but Pre EC this was definitely not accomplished)

Post ec tied up everthing.

Vigil was near the end of game - in the other words comparable to timeline of Cronos Station chat wíth Vendetta

Catalyst did this in pretty obvious way

Pre-EC full cliffhanger Post-EC destroy cliffhanger

Post EC just tried to explain mess with more mess...

Illos is part of the end not before the end.
Post-ec give a clear expliantion. Most who just say it a mess just don't try to understand it.  You just tune out once the catalyst pops out.

Part of the end of a chapter in a 3 chapter story.

[dreman9999]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Hexley UK wrote...

The end of a chapter in a 3 chapter story.

With each chapter being relatively self-contained stories. Vigil never pops up again. He's a new character introduced at the end of a story for exposition purposes and to give Shepard and co. a bit of a Deus Ex Machina to beat Sovereign.

Thank you...That's my point.

[dreman9999]

Hexley UK wrote...

dreman9999 wrote...

Applepie_Svk wrote...

Dreman´s logic attacking another thread

dreman9999 wrote...


ME1 did this with Virgil.


The catalyst did not do this.

Do Tie up loose ends of significance. (Post EC is up for debate, but Pre EC this was definitely not accomplished)

Post ec tied up everthing.

Vigil was near the end of game - in the other words comparable to timeline of Cronos Station chat wíth Vendetta

Catalyst did this in pretty obvious way

Pre-EC full cliffhanger Post-EC destroy cliffhanger

Post EC just tried to explain mess with more mess...

Illos is part of the end not before the end.
Post-ec give a clear expliantion. Most who just say it a mess just don't try to understand it.  You just tune out once the catalyst pops out.

Part of the end of a chapter in a 3 chapter story.

More like 3 divided books. ME is no where near 3 chapters.

[Hexley UK]

dreman9999 wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

Hexley UK wrote...

The end of a chapter in a 3 chapter story.

With each chapter being relatively self-contained stories. Vigil never pops up again. He's a new character introduced at the end of a story for exposition purposes and to give Shepard and co. a bit of a Deus Ex Machina to beat Sovereign.

Thank you...That's my point.

And your point is irrelevant as it's not the end of the entire story just the end of part 1 of a 3 part story.

[Applepie_Svk]

dreman9999 wrote...

Illos is part of the end not before the end.
Post-ec give a clear expliantion. Most who just say it a mess just don't try to understand it.  You just tune out once the catalyst pops out.

Do you know how far-fetched it sounds ? 

It´s either end or not the end ... case closed 

So the Cronos station is part of last act of game and yet it´s not the ending - ending are just last 30 minutes of whole game filled with 2 conversations and not 2-3 hours since the entry to Cronos Station...

EDIT:
By my logic is the end - when you cross the last line on the maraton as the winner or looser, but you will cross it so by this you will finish your run.

By your logic is the end - last 50 meters in front of last line which you need to cross, till you won´t cross your line you will never achieve your ending.

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 18 septembre 2012 - 05:32 .