889 réponses à ce sujet

[GreyLycanTrope]

Walter's notes:


Do they seem particularly organize and thought out and in line with an established narrative?

[AdmiralCheez]

The problem here is that Mass Effect was never hard, speculative science fiction; it was a Hollywood-style hero's epic through and through. Looking at the endings separate from the whole, they have their merits (you could write a book detailing the possible outcomes and ethical dilemmas of each). However, taken in context with the rest of the narrative, they don't fit at all. You don't get to completely change the direction of the narrative in the final act just because you had a really cool idea--those are best saved for your next project. Never sacrifice the story as a whole for the sake of an artistic whim.

Those conflicts and ideas described in the OP formed the core of their respective narratives. They worked because the authors devoted a lot of time and energy to them, considering how every detail would affect the final outcome. Mass Effect, on the other hand, is less about its ideas and more about its characters. Bioware's good at characters, but struggles with the hardcore speculative aspect of science fiction. They should have played to their strengths, especially in the final act. Yes, it's important to try new things, but it's just as important to know when that sort of thing is appropriate.

[ShepnTali]

lol.. the 'genius' card.

[Seival]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Seival wrote...
ME3 never throw any random concepts. The ending and everything we learned before are the organic whole.

Organic-vs-synthetic problem was there from the very beginning. Everything was coming to what we've seen in ME3 ending. Ending was unpredictable, and it showed us what the story is about, and that was brilliant. Everything that happend before matters.

Right the Krogan arc had everything to do with the Synthetics organics conflict, as did our action agains the collectors/ sarcasm.
The conflcit being present, and resolved before hand I might add, doesn't make it the central theme. We've had machines standing with us against the Reapers since ME2, we might still be fighting Reapers but we're fighting them because they're a faction trying to kill us, not because they're synthetics and all synthetics are bad. Much like we're not fighting Cerberus because they're organic but because they're a faction trying to kill us.

The whole Krogan arc was a perfect example of how artificial temporary solutions ruin themselves eventually. The "synthetics on our side" arc was the perfect example of how the exception to the rule approves the rule. Any peace between too different entities can remain only temporary...

...Those arcs fit the story and its ending just perfectly. You just failed to see the whole picture.

Modifié par Seival, 06 novembre 2012 - 08:56 .

[Davik Kang]

Suspire wrote...
I mean that they had no idea how the following games in the sequel would be like, and they had a lot of different ideas for the ending, so they decided on what to write as they went along They had no ending planned from ME1. So "respect teh artistz intent, u didnt noe it!!" is bull****.

You know that writers don't write a story in the exact order it's presented to the audience, right?  You are aware that they write it piece by piece and add things and take away things from every part of the story as they go along... right?

And how exactly did they make the other 99% of the story so enjoyable for everybody?  Blind luck on the part of bad writers perhaps?

[M Hedonist]

Seival wrote...

Star Wars title is just silly adventure without any good story. Just action, action, more action, and overhyped popularity. Completely empty and useless universe.

You have no soul.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Seival wrote...

The whole Krogan arc was a perfect example of how artificial temporary solutions ruin themselves eventually. The "synthetics on our side" arc was the perfect example of how the exception to the rule approves the rule. Any peace between too different entities can remain only temporary...

...Those arcs fit the story and its ending just perfectly. You just failed to see the whole picture.

How does that arc show that artifical temporary solutions ruin themselves? You can win with or without curing the genophage. Each is a valid option, it proves nothing.
 Peace remains temporary even in synthesis and control and especially destroy. You have not attained utopia.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 06 novembre 2012 - 09:02 .

[M Hedonist]

The madgod has returned to BSN! Cheese for everyone!

Seival wrote...

The whole Krogan arc was a perfect example of how artificial temporary solutions ruin themselves eventually.

??????????????

The "synthetics on our side" arc was the perfect example of how the exception to the rule approves the rule. Any peace between too different entities can remain only temporary...

Really? The "exception proves the rule" fallacy? Come on, that's kindergarten argumentation.
Do you even know what that means, really? Because your "perfect example" is in no way the exception that proves the rule. It's like your throwing out random quotes and phrases, hoping they will make a reasonable argument. That never worked... ever... in your entire time on this forum.

[Seival]

Sauruz wrote...

Seival wrote...

Star Wars title is just silly adventure without any good story. Just action, action, more action, and overhyped popularity. Completely empty and useless universe.

You have no soul.

What is "the soul"?
How can you prove that it exists?

"Does that unit have a soul" is meaningless question on religious topic, which can easily provoke a 300 years long war. And we all know that history just loves to repeat itself.

[Suspire]

Davik Kang wrote...

Suspire wrote...
I mean that they had no idea how the following games in the sequel would be like, and they had a lot of different ideas for the ending, so they decided on what to write as they went along They had no ending planned from ME1. So "respect teh artistz intent, u didnt noe it!!" is bull****.

You know that writers don't write a story in the exact order it's presented to the audience, right?  You are aware that they write it piece by piece and add things and take away things from every part of the story as they go along... right?

And how exactly did they make the other 99% of the story so enjoyable for everybody?  Blind luck on the part of bad writers perhaps?

If for some reason you wanna pretend all the BW interviews, all the info we have and all the info that exists on game development is all a big lie and they did plan it from the start, that would make it worse as the games have more inconsistancies than my grandma's skin. So fail anyway.

What other 99%? Cause from what I know, ME1>ME2>ME3 in order of quality and popularity (debatable for ME2, but it was then that the FPS crowd started liking BW, and even though I like the game, it's not for it's story).
Like it's any secret that BW games have been getting worse with each release lol.

Edit: and about your last question, we have a number of things to blame for the abysmal drop in writing quality of the endings (even if the rest wasn't flawless writing, cause it really wasn't), pure bad decision making combined with rushed deadline, old team leaving the staff, over ambition and swollen egos, being more and more out of touch with your fans, wanting to do something "different" (er, just not different from Deus Ex and the Matrix) just for the sake of being edgy and cool etc.

The guy who wrote ME1 wasn't even in ME3 at all, lol.

Modifié par Suspire, 06 novembre 2012 - 09:29 .

[M Hedonist]

Seival wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

Seival wrote...

Star Wars title is just silly adventure without any good story. Just action, action, more action, and overhyped popularity. Completely empty and useless universe.

You have no soul.

What is "the soul"?
How can you prove that it exists?

"Does that unit have a soul" is meaningless question on religious topic, which can easily provoke a 300 years long war. And we all know that history just loves to repeat itself.

Let's not get theological here and stay on subject. I was just baffled by you once more, nothing special.

[Seival]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Seival wrote...

The whole Krogan arc was a perfect example of how artificial temporary solutions ruin themselves eventually. The "synthetics on our side" arc was the perfect example of how the exception to the rule approves the rule. Any peace between too different entities can remain only temporary...

...Those arcs fit the story and its ending just perfectly. You just failed to see the whole picture.

How does that arc show that artifical temporary solutions ruin themselves? You can win with or without curing the genophage. Each is a valid option, it proves nothing.
 Peace remains temporary even in synthesis and control and especially destroy. You have not attained utopia.

You can win without curing the Genophage, but Krogan can't. Genophage was developed to bring peace to the Galaxy, but it brought only doom upon one particular race: the Krogan. But before that Krogan were uplifted, used and then abandoned like annoying beasts.

Rachni were alien to everyone, were used and abandoned. Krogan were alien to everyone, were used and abandoned. Geth are alien to everyone... they were used and will be abandoned.

Alien is the key word here. Synthesis destroyes the very meaning of the word. While all other endings just provide some delay for Synthesis.

...I hope the whole picture started to appear in your head?

Modifié par Seival, 06 novembre 2012 - 09:21 .

[drayfish]

Seival wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

@Seival

I am pretty sure the person who gave us the Character of James DiGriz would not condone the enforced conformity and acceptance at gunpoint a choice such as oh, Synthesis.

For one to quote an author and use one of his works as the basis of your "proof", isn't it rather pretentious to ignore his OTHER works and claim that the author would support *your* view point, contrary to what hus other works would suggest?

You didn't get it, did you? OP was not used to approve or disprove Synthesis, Control, or Destroy. It was used to show that any good sci-fi story has deep philosophical meaning, and different people might have different points of view on that meaning.

Very few people understood what I meant here. And if the rest can't understand that simple OP, then how can they understand ME3 ending in first place?

The title of your thread is 'Harry Harrison would love ME3 ending. As would any genius sci-fi writer.'

Your OP attempts (incredibly ignorantly) to draw direct equivilencies between the plot structure and themes of Deathworld and the ending of Mass Effect 3; and you spent several pages of this thread declaring that people need to read Harrison's book to appreciate how it relates to Bioware's conclusion.  There really is no misunderstanding the position that you have put forward.

I'm not sure whether you finally Googled Harry Harrison's name or not, but obviously you realise that your whole argument was nonsense now and you are either lying to cover that up, or you are so blind to your own position that discussion with you is utterly pointless.

Either way...

[drayfish]

ALL WRITERS CAN BE COMPARED WITH MASS EFFECT!



Example:

Dr. Seuss would love ME3 ending. As would any genius writer!


“Catch! calls the Once-ler.
He lets something fall.
It's a Truffula Seed.
It's the last one of all!
You're in charge of the last of the Truffula Seeds.
And Truffula Trees are what everyone needs.
Plant a new Truffula. Treat it with care.
Give it clean water. And feed it fresh air.
Grow a forest. Protect it from axes that hack.
Then the Lorax
and all of his friends
may come back.”

- Dr. Seuss, The Lorax


DR. SEUSS IS THE CATALYST!


(1) Dr. Seuss believes in the periodic extermination of all life in the universe. The only way to ensure that all life is preserved, argues Dr. Seuss, is to wipe all varieties of life from the galaxy in a genocidal pruning.

(2) Clearly Dr. Seuss was programmed by a (possibly) extinct race of narcissistic fish monsters who allowed his AI programming too much latitude in its mission statement. That's why his writing it so rhymed and nonsensical. It's a glitch.

(3) Dr. Seuss discovered the secrets of Dark Space in the Cat in the Hat's hat. In the hat of the Cat. Not where he sat. His hat. What do you think about that?


Thoughts?

Modifié par drayfish, 06 novembre 2012 - 09:26 .

[Applepie_Svk]

Sauruz wrote...

The madgod has returned to BSN! Cheese for everyone!

Seival wrote...

The whole Krogan arc was a perfect example of how artificial temporary solutions ruin themselves eventually.

??????????????

The "synthetics on our side" arc was the perfect example of how the exception to the rule approves the rule. Any peace between too different entities can remain only temporary...

Really? The "exception proves the rule" fallacy? Come on, that's kindergarten argumentation.
Do you even know what that means, really? Because your "perfect example" is in no way the exception that proves the rule. It's like your throwing out random quotes and phrases, hoping they will make a reasonable argument. That never worked... ever... in your entire time on this forum.

Bwahahaha.... the rule created by main antagonist without any kind of evidence to support it, only evidence which we have is that synthetics of last two cycles were used against other as a tool by Reapers to wage war in cycle.
This so called rule is nothing more than fallacy and no matter how hard you will try it will never end in any other way, because Catalyst always used synthetic life with same goal to wage war - to prove his sick reasoning, Catalyst is simply mad AI playing with ants...

Modifié par Applepie_Svk, 06 novembre 2012 - 09:30 .

[Seival]

drayfish wrote...

Seival wrote...

Archonsg wrote...

@Seival

I am pretty sure the person who gave us the Character of James DiGriz would not condone the enforced conformity and acceptance at gunpoint a choice such as oh, Synthesis.

For one to quote an author and use one of his works as the basis of your "proof", isn't it rather pretentious to ignore his OTHER works and claim that the author would support *your* view point, contrary to what hus other works would suggest?

You didn't get it, did you? OP was not used to approve or disprove Synthesis, Control, or Destroy. It was used to show that any good sci-fi story has deep philosophical meaning, and different people might have different points of view on that meaning.

Very few people understood what I meant here. And if the rest can't understand that simple OP, then how can they understand ME3 ending in first place?

The title of your thread is 'Harry Harrison would love ME3 ending. As would any genius sci-fi writer.'

Your OP attempts (incredibly ignorantly) to draw direct equivilencies between the plot structure and themes of Deathworld and the ending of Mass Effect 3; and you spent several pages of this thread declaring that people need to read Harrison's book to appreciate how it relates to Bioware's conclusion.  There really is no misunderstanding the position that you have put forward.

I'm not sure whether you finally Googled Harry Harrison's name or not, but obviously you realise that your whole argument was nonsense now and you are either lying to cover that up, or you are so blind to your own position that discussion with you is utterly pointless.

Either way...

Your previous posts already showed you didn't understand OP at all. You really don't need to add to it.

Modifié par Seival, 06 novembre 2012 - 09:29 .

[GreyLycanTrope]

Seival wrote...
You can win without curing the Genophage, but Krogan can't. Genophage was developed to bring peace to the Galaxy, but it brought only doom upon one particular race: the Krogan. But before that Krogan were uplifted, used and then abandoned like annoying beasts.

Rachni were alien to everyone, were used and abandoned. Krogan were alien to everyone, were used and abandoned. Geth are alien to everyone... they were used and will be abandoned.

Alien is the key word here. Synthesis destroyes the very meaning of the word. While all other endings just provide some delay for Synthesis.

...I hope the whole picture started to appear in your head?

Yeah and you're off. Synthesis will not stop all conflict. The galaxy hasn't been homogenized to the point of one single form. Aliens still exist their physcially apperanced haven't changed, not has their culture. The term alien can also be applied to view points, as well as physcial form, Synthesis solved nothing in terms of that.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 06 novembre 2012 - 09:31 .

[drayfish]

Seival wrote...

drayfish wrote...

The title of your thread is 'Harry Harrison would love ME3 ending. As would any genius sci-fi writer.'

Your OP attempts (incredibly ignorantly) to draw direct equivilencies between the plot structure and themes of Deathworld and the ending of Mass Effect 3; and you spent several pages of this thread declaring that people need to read Harrison's book to appreciate how it relates to Bioware's conclusion. There really is no misunderstanding the position that you have put forward.

I'm not sure whether you finally Googled Harry Harrison's name or not, but obviously you realise that your whole argument was nonsense now and you are either lying to cover that up, or you are so blind to your own position that discussion with you is utterly pointless.

Either way...

Your previous posts already showed you didn't understand OP at all. You really don't need to add to it.

Lying then.

Good to know.

Modifié par drayfish, 06 novembre 2012 - 09:36 .

[Anti-killer]

Seival wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Seival wrote...


...I'm glad that BioWere writers were inspired by true sci-fi, and not by Star Wars.

You're glad BioWare were (allegedly) inspired by some little-known sci-fi conceptualist, rather than the most popular science fiction franchise in history? 

Seival's made up rules about fiction are hilarious. 

Star Wars title is just silly adventure without any good story. Just action, action, more action, and overhyped popularity. Completely empty and useless universe.

...I'm astonished. I really, really am.

[Redbelle]

Seival wrote...

Sauruz wrote...

Seival wrote...

Star Wars title is just silly adventure without any good story. Just action, action, more action, and overhyped popularity. Completely empty and useless universe.

You have no soul.

What is "the soul"?
How can you prove that it exists?

"Does that unit have a soul" is meaningless question on religious topic, which can easily provoke a 300 years long war. And we all know that history just loves to repeat itself.

Let's kick this back to more fundamentals. Do you have faith in something you cannot see and have not touched?

DNA for example. Have you actually ever seen some? You've seen representational pictures and maybe an electron microscope slide but have you ever gone searching for yourself and found some?

The people who put those pictures into text books did so for the purpose of educating others, but ultimately we take it on faith that they are correct.

Newton thought his laws of motion could explain how planets revolve around the sun. And it did. with a few wrinkles that people overlooked on faith. Then  Einstein popped up and proved Newton had made errors in his assumptions and presented a new theory that did explain how the solar system works. And now we take that on faith that he's right.

Who is to say that just because we haven't discovered something, doesn't mean it's there. The universe is full of things we haven't discovered. I simply have faith that by staying true to our need to be curious we will discover certain things that will lead on to more discoveries, and more.

It's funny though. Science seems to be catching up to religion. The Higgs Bosun was recently discovered and as well as asking what it can do, scientists are now arguing over why it can do what it does. So many theories that can not currently be proven yet camps are springing up defending these outlooks. They may seem to be operating off of logic but science is the pursuit of truth and each camp has faith that their truth is the right one.
 
Fortunately I have faith that we will not see a repeat of history where these divides will lead to scientists throwing lit bunsen's into lab's of the opposition with a petri of magnesium taped to the side.

If your still wondering if souls exist though? Well it's up to the individual. We can accept or reject truth and lies and the topic of having a soul is no different.

Seriously though. Why doesn't Seiv want a soul? He'd be like Voldermort living off Unicorn blood living a half life.

Does the soul exist? Here's one view on the matter

http://www.psycholog...idence-says-yes

[Seival]

Greylycantrope wrote...

Seival wrote...
You can win without curing the Genophage, but Krogan can't. Genophage was developed to bring peace to the Galaxy, but it brought only doom upon one particular race: the Krogan. But before that Krogan were uplifted, used and then abandoned like annoying beasts.

Rachni were alien to everyone, were used and abandoned. Krogan were alien to everyone, were used and abandoned. Geth are alien to everyone... they were used and will be abandoned.

Alien is the key word here. Synthesis destroyes the very meaning of the word. While all other endings just provide some delay for Synthesis.

...I hope the whole picture started to appear in your head?

Yeah and you're off. Synthesis will not stop all conflict. The galaxy hasn't been homogenized to the point of one single form. Aliens still exist their physcially apperanced haven't changed, not has their culture. The term alien can also be applied to view points, as well as physcial form, Synthesis solved nothing in terms of that.

Of course Synthesis will not stop all conflicts. It will only stop the most deadly and pointless ones. The ones based on "Alien" word. "Alien" not it terms of different points of view, but in terms of complete difference and hostility on physiological and subconscious level.

[M Hedonist]

Alright Seival, just tell me one thing: What do I have to do to get the Wabbajack? Kill a giant animal with a fork? Convince a village of superstitious people that the world is ending? Venture into the mind of an insane, dead regent? Because I'd do anything to have that thing in real life.

[GreyLycanTrope]

Alien:
1. Owing political allegiance to another country or government; foreign: alien residents.
2. Belonging to, characteristic of, or constituting another and very different place, society, or person; strange. See Synonyms at foreign.
3.  Dissimilar, inconsistent, or opposed, as in nature

It won't remove prejudice, not by a long shot. What the hell does most deadly conflict even mean? All conflict is deadly.

Modifié par Greylycantrope, 06 novembre 2012 - 09:51 .

[M Hedonist]

Seival wrote...

Of course Synthesis will not stop all conflicts. It will only stop the most deadly and pointless ones. The ones based on "Alien" word. "Alien" not it terms of different points of view, but in terms of complete difference and hostility on physiological and subconscious level.

Even if your rambling nonsense was true, the galaxy would eventually come into contact with other, "alien", galaxies.

[Redbelle]

Seival wrote...

malakim2099 wrote...

tl;dr

The problem with comparing this to mind-bending science fiction writers that are good, is that the intent to challenge your conceptions is there right from the beginning. If this was that type of story from the beginning... I might not have a problem with that. The problem is that Mass Effect was NOT that kind of story, until the final 10-15 minutes of the third game.

It would be like if Return of the Jedi ended with Luke and Vader entering the Emperor's throne room... only to see the 2001 Monolith there. CUT TO CREDITS.

Mass Effect is that kind of story. You can't say that story showed you its complete concept untill you read it to the very end. The fact is that in last 15 minutes we finally knew what the story is about. Mass Effect had to have some interesting turn of events in the end. And that turn of events had to have philosophical meaning...

...I'm glad that BioWere writers were inspired by true sci-fi, and not by Star Wars.

Ok, breath Red. It'll be over in a minute.

Stories, possess a beginning, a middle and an end. When you begin a story you have the job of getting people involved by telling them who is in the created universe, what setting the universe will take, the time of that universe, the issues that will be addressed and so on and so forth. This is setting the scene and it's really important!

The middle is where stuff happens relating to the beginning. But it also allows you to redefine what the beginning meant. Mystery novels do this alot where the beginning poses questions and the middle gives answers which can then lead to more questions and answers.

The End: By now you should have your answers and seek a resolution to what problem posed the original question. The hero should know everything he needs to know and set a course towards resolution................. You can have a plot twist, but you need to be on top of your game to fit something into a story that matches the pacing towards the end, and is relevant to the story. Fitting in plot twist after plot twist after plot twist requires explanation and the vast majority of explanations should go in the middle of the story, not the end. Resolutions take time to resolve and the more time you take away from resolving can be detrimental to the book. Unless your planning on releasing a series in which case it's a hook. But if you intend to finish the story it's ill advised. Especially for a novice.