307 réponses à ce sujet

[David7204]

You're making basically the same mistake. For every one 'ruthless' ruler like Khan, there are millions who failed. Who were simply shot or stabbed or got sick. Who were too incompetent, or simply too unlucky.

Is it likely that a horsemen born in a tent would forge the largest empire in the history of humanity, twice as large as Rome? Of course not. It's completely ridiculous. But is that plot armor? Is that the history books 'twisting the narrative'? No. That's WHY the history books focus on him. Because he was the one that succeeded out of millions. It's the exact same with Shepard. There are millions of soldiers in the galaxy, and perhaps millions of heroes. But Shepard is the ONE who succeeded. That's why the story is about him.

Hence, it's natural and justifed for us to expect Shepard to win, no matter how unlikely it is.

Modifié par David7204, 30 janvier 2013 - 04:00 .

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

You're making basically the same mistake. For every one 'ruthless' ruler like Khan, there are millions who failed. Who were simply shot or stabbed or got sick. Who were too incompetent, or simply too unlucky.

Is it likely that a horsemen born in a tent would forge the largest empire in the history of humanity, twice as large as Rome? Of course not. It's completely ridiculous. But is that plot armor? Is that the history books 'twisting the narrative'? No. That's WHY the history books focus on him. Because he was the one that succeeded out of millions. It's the exact same with Shepard.

. The difference is that Shepard isn't real.  Genghis Kahn was.  Shepard succeeds because he was written to.  Temujin succeded because he was the nastiest mother****er on Earth at the time.

[David7204]

That doesn't make any difference.

[DeinonSlayer]

Copied from the other thread:

DeinonSlayer wrote...

David7204 wrote...

If heroism is meaningful, then Paragon choices leading the best outcome is the logical conclusion.

Compulsive Paragon Shepard saves the factory workers and lets Vido Santiago get away.

Vido Santiago comes back in ME3 and makes an attempt on Shepard's life which instead claims a member of the squad (Zaeed maybe, whose loss would then have big negative ramifications down the road).

Not an unforseeable consequence. Your reaction?

[David7204]

Immense frustration.

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

That doesn't make any difference.

. Yes it DOES!  Shepard success because he was designed to by an intelligence ( using the ter rather loosely). Genghis Kahn succeeded because of his own merits, not the whim of a third omniscient party.

[Belisarius25]

Shameless self promotion, this is the topic Deinon is referring to, I started it to try to figure out when/how often choosing the paragon choice has negative effects (and to try to make some qualitative judgment as to whether those effects are substantial or not).

Anyway, back to the usual back-and-forth arguing with nobody listening to each other.

Modifié par Belisarius25, 30 janvier 2013 - 04:05 .

[StayFrosty05]

Steelcan wrote...

StayFrosty05 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...
 Picture this.  

Mongol horde is on the march, I am the ruler of a small kingdom.  I've spent the past years building trade alliances and treaties and military agreements,  Mongols show up, I'm left to rot by my "allies". Mongols burn down my kingdom.

Instead of playing nice I build up my army, make myself powerful, Mongols aren't so keen on attacking anymore.

....And if you have been an *ss to all your neighbours, watch your back because you have no Allies to contend with...while your dealing with scaring off the horde knocking at your front door, your too distracted to notice the neighbours creeping through your back door to plant that dagger in your back while your busy or momentarily down....perfect time to get rid of the *sshole next door....

. Or if you're really ruthless, you strike a deal with them:devil:

It had better be a pretty sweet deal....

[Steelcan]

StayFrosty05 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

StayFrosty05 wrote...

....And if you have been an *ss to all your neighbours, watch your back because you have no Allies to contend with...while your dealing with scaring off the horde knocking at your front door, your too distracted to notice the neighbours creeping through your back door to plant that dagger in your back while your busy or momentarily down....perfect time to get rid of the *sshole next door....

. Or if you're really ruthless, you strike a deal with them:devil:

It had better be a pretty sweet deal....

. When it comes to Mongols, not dying is about as good as it gets

[DeinonSlayer]

Steelcan wrote...

David7204 wrote...

That doesn't make any difference.

. Yes it DOES!  Shepard success because he was designed to by an intelligence ( using the ter rather loosely). Genghis Kahn succeeded because of his own merits, not the whim of a third omniscient party.

I think the difference is, David7204 thinks Hero Shepard should succeed because he's "predestined" to, and anything falling short of that "ideal" should be punished. Steelcan and I think the consequences to Shepard's actions should stem from what those actions are, irregardless of the ideals behind them. Sometimes pragmatism is rewarded better than idealism.

Modifié par DeinonSlayer, 30 janvier 2013 - 04:08 .

[StayFrosty05]

Steelcan wrote...

StayFrosty05 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

StayFrosty05 wrote...

....And if you have been an *ss to all your neighbours, watch your back because you have no Allies to contend with...while your dealing with scaring off the horde knocking at your front door, your too distracted to notice the neighbours creeping through your back door to plant that dagger in your back while your busy or momentarily down....perfect time to get rid of the *sshole next door....

. Or if you're really ruthless, you strike a deal with them:devil:

It had better be a pretty sweet deal....

. When it comes to Mongols, not dying is about as good as it gets

Meh....I got Shep and Dovahkin, their one man Armies, it's like having one Rambo and one Chuck Norris in my pocket........I WIN!!!...

Modifié par StayFrosty05, 30 janvier 2013 - 04:12 .

[Belisarius25]

To be fair to David, I think his point is a bit more nuanced than that. Beyond favoring a paragon/"ideal hero" Shepard, I think he's also suggesting that some people deviate too far from the 'ideal hero' and succeed despite taking actions that probably should undermine their efforts (although the fault there is really on Bioware for not programming/writing better).

I don't David is wrong in saying that a Shepard who murders tons of people or is too ruthless should face consequences any more than a Shepard who is blindly optimistic and always goes paragon. 

The real issue, of course, is limitations due to money, writing potential, programming ability, time, the limitations of the paragon/renegade route, etc.

Modifié par Belisarius25, 30 janvier 2013 - 04:11 .

[Steelcan]

Cthulhu42 wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

StayFrosty05 wrote...
It had better be a pretty sweet deal....

. When it comes to Mongols, not dying is about as good as it gets

You could pay them in boards.

How many boards would the Mongols hoard if the Mongol hordes got bored?

. All of them

[David7204]

That's what a story is: 'predestination.' That's probably not the best term, but it fits well enough.

By nature, a story is about the exceptional, the unique, the uncanny, the unexpected, the unlikely. When someone says "I have a story to tell you," you expect something worthwhile. As you should. You except something amazing or incredible or fantastic. So yes, the protagonist of any story is 'predestined' to experience something or other right from the get-go. In a story about heroism, the protagonist is 'predestined' to encounter heroism.

If nothing happened, then there wouldn't be a story. So yes, the audience will always 'know' to some extent.

Modifié par David7204, 30 janvier 2013 - 04:16 .

[CynicalShep]

David7204 wrote...

It's not stupidity. Balak is not a criminal mastermind. He's not a technical wizard. He's a thug that landed on the right asteroid at the right time and got lucky.

Saving the lives of the crew is more important.

He is what? He is the leader of a terrorist group and he hates humanity. He didn't "get lucky", he came to X-57 with a mission - intercept the asteroid and use it to destroy the colony. He ralied some men and almost did the job. Let him go and he will attempt it again. 

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

That's what a story is: 'predestination.' That's probably not the best term, but it fits well enough.

By nature, a story is about the exceptional, the unique, the uncanny, the unexpected, the unlikely. When someone says "I have a story to tell you," you expect something worthwhile. As you should. You except something amazing or incredible or fantastic. So yes, the protagonist of any story is 'predestined' to experience something or other right from the get-go. In a story about heroism, the protagonist is 'predestined' to encounter heroism.

. His actions can be entirely unheroic, downright evil in some cases, but he's still the "hero" even if he's a class V Anti-Hero.  And those decisns should not be any less valid than the actions of a naive goody two shoes. 

[David7204]

I am near certain that Balak only planned to make a quick slave grab, and only decided to bomb Terra Nova once he found out the engines were already in place and set to go.

Modifié par David7204, 30 janvier 2013 - 04:19 .

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

I am near certain that Balak only planned to make a quick slave grab, and only decided to bomb Terra Nova once he found out the engines were already in place and set to go.

. Based on what?  He says he is the first of an invasion.  His subordinates were tricked into thinking it was a slave grab, but then they found out the truth.

[Steelcan]

I can't take any more of this. I'm out.

*head slam on plastic desk*

[David7204]

Steelcan wrote...

David7204 wrote...

That's what a story is: 'predestination.' That's probably not the best term, but it fits well enough.

By nature, a story is about the exceptional, the unique, the uncanny, the unexpected, the unlikely. When someone says "I have a story to tell you," you expect something worthwhile. As you should. You except something amazing or incredible or fantastic. So yes, the protagonist of any story is 'predestined' to experience something or other right from the get-go. In a story about heroism, the protagonist is 'predestined' to encounter heroism.

. His actions can be entirely unheroic, downright evil in some cases, but he's still the "hero" even if he's a class V Anti-Hero.  And those decisns should not be any less valid than the actions of a naive goody two shoes. 

Well, yes, ideally most decisions should have consequences, good or bad. (Although let's not be stupid and trivialize the incredible amount of work that requires.) But they certainly shouldn't all be good consequences. As I said, heroic choices need to lead to better outcomes.

Modifié par David7204, 30 janvier 2013 - 04:23 .

[CynicalShep]

David7204 wrote...

I am near certain that Balak only planned to make a quick slave grab, and only decided to bomb Terra Nova once he found out the engines were already in place and set to go.

http://masseffect.wikia.com/wiki/Ka'hairal_Balak
"Unlike the other batarians, who only planned to make a quick slave grab, Balak was on a mission to crash Asteroid X57 into the human colony of Terra Nova". I am near certain that you are wrong

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

That's what a story is: 'predestination.' That's probably not the best term, but it fits well enough.

By nature, a story is about the exceptional, the unique, the uncanny, the unexpected, the unlikely. When someone says "I have a story to tell you," you expect something worthwhile. As you should. You except something amazing or incredible or fantastic. So yes, the protagonist of any story is 'predestined' to experience something or other right from the get-go. In a story about heroism, the protagonist is 'predestined' to encounter heroism.

If nothing happened, then there wouldn't be a story. So yes, the audience will always 'know' to some extent.

"Hero does good deeds and gets rewarded" isn't uncanny or unexpected though. It's cliche and formulaic. You replied "immense frustration" to the Vido example I posted above, even though it's a perfectly logical outcome. You're responding to the formula you expect the writers to have codified instead of what's actually happening in the narrative.

That's the point I'm trying to get across. The player should be made to stop and think about the consequences of the actions they're taking. You said paragon = heroism and heroism should be rewarded. I say players shouldn't be secure in the knowledge that clicking that same corner of the wheel every single time will always work out for them.

[David7204]

I might be. It's been a long time since I've played Bring down the Sky. But I'd have to go back and check. The wiki is not the most reliable source.

[CynicalShep]

David7204 wrote...

I might be. It's been a long time since I've played Bring down the Sky. But I'd have to go back and check. The wiki is not the most reliable source.

I have played it fairly recently. It's what happens. Balak isn't a simple thug. He is the highest ranking batarian officer in ME3 if you spare him. He is a cunning, dangerous man. He hates humans. You let him live.