292 réponses à ce sujet

[chemiclord]

For what it's worth, I still totally respect myself after a lapdance.

And I like to think I tip well too.

Then again, I never get a happy ending THERE, either. I deal with it.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

chemiclord wrote...

For what it's worth, I still totally respect myself after a lapdance.

And I like to think I tip well too.

Then again, I never get a happy ending THERE, either. I deal with it.

So what you're saying is you only go to strip clubs that have artistic integrity?

I can get behind that.  all the way behind that. 

Modifié par Doctor_Jackstraw, 13 mars 2013 - 09:09 .

[Punisher cork]

Bill Casey wrote...

Basically, you want to change the entire trilogy to suit the ending rather than the other way around?

This drell gets it. 

[KLGChaos]

Ok, Doc, I'm done debating with you. Because someone doesn't agree with your opinion that art is more important than everything else, it makes you want to kill yourself? Quite the melodrama there.

I'll just say that I disagree with your views and leave it at that.

[Jamie9]

Agreed. There's a reason I think the Virmire choice is one of the hardest in the trilogy (yes, I like both Kaidan and Ashley).

[IntoTheDarkness]

What? Am I dreaming? Glad to see another one on the forum who actually doesn't whine about not having perfect victory with player-dictated conditions.

I wholeheartedly agree with every single point of OP. Bioware games have always had issues with easy choices and player stupidity not being punished, and actually this is an aspect I always was disappointed with even more so than the endings. I would love to see some real consequences showing up and slapping players full in the face like a little ****.

[Gweedotk]

Lets hope we are faced with a vast amount of difficult choices in the next game.

[AlexMBrennan]

Right, the most complained about aspect of Me2 and Me3 is the lack of contrived sadistic choices (Virmire)

[Reorte]

Jamie9 wrote...

Agreed. There's a reason I think the Virmire choice is one of the hardest in the trilogy (yes, I like both Kaidan and Ashley).

It's hard if you like the characters but that's all. It doesn't punch you in the guts as hard as losing someone should because there's no way of avoiding it. Bad things happening in games because you've screwed up is good. Unavoidable ones aren't. Sometimes the best outcome should be very, very hard to achieve though (it's too easy in ME). Then they're very rewarding. It should also possibly involve a bit of good luck; I'm undecided on whether or not that would be a good idea or an awful one.

Maybe some should be influenced more by gameplay - need to get to a character in time to stop them from dying, that sort of thing. Now of course people can always reload and try again but I don't think that that should be used as an excuse for making bad outcomes inevitable.

Modifié par Reorte, 14 mars 2013 - 07:22 .

[Gweedotk]

There should never be a "perfect playthrough" any more than there should be "an evil and a virtuous playthrough."

ME2 for example could have polarized the differences between a human supremacist Shepard and a Council Loyalist Shepard and choices could have reflected that. You can't be both anymore than you can be a Confederate Slaveowner and a Union Abolitionist.

The question isn't about whether players should be rewarded; the question is whether anyone path is the "right" path. The Paragon path is generally considered the "right" path no matter who you are. This is made apparent by the trivialization of certain Renegade choices (major choices I might add), most notably the Rachni choice.

The allowance of a perfect playthrough may seem harmless, but it can quickly turn into a monotonous, linear experience.

I'll give a more recent example. On the Omega DLC, there isn't much leeway for choice. In fact it's quite linear, as are arguably all of the DLC's for ME3. Your given two choices; one concerning the life of the general and the other concerning the shutdown of shield barriers throughout the station. The rest of the DLC is pretty straightforward, with only the variety of fetching a few items for some random NPC's at the HQ.

The DLC could have been vastly improved with choices between certain factors with much different outcomes, such as perhaps choosing between Aria's control of Omega or backing Nyreen's control, each with different side effects. As it stands Nyreen dies regardless of what you want or do and, unfortunately, this is what "perfet playthroughs" eventually boil down to- the removal of choice in favor of a linear experience.

Modifié par Gweedotk, 15 mars 2013 - 12:53 .

[o Ventus]

Doctor_Jackstraw wrote...

also, the pitch behind paragon and renegade wasn't "Good vs Evil"  Paragon is Spock, Renegade is Kirk.  Kirk isnt evil and spock isnt "always good", its just a set of principles.  paragon is idealism, while renegade is pragmatism.  thats not good and evil and its ****ty that ME2 boiled it down to a simplistic kotor style morality.  :/

Stopped reading right about here.

The overload of bulls*it nearly fried my head.

[o Ventus]

IntoTheDarkness wrote...

What? Am I dreaming? Glad to see another one on the forum who actually doesn't whine about not having perfect victory with player-dictated conditions.

I wholeheartedly agree with every single point of OP. Bioware games have always had issues with easy choices and player stupidity not being punished, and actually this is an aspect I always was disappointed with even more so than the endings. I would love to see some real consequences showing up and slapping players full in the face like a little ****.

Charming.

[KLGChaos]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Right, the most complained about aspect of Me2 and Me3 is the lack of contrived sadistic choices (Virmire)

Well, the emo kiddies need something dark and dreary so they can have a reason to start cutting. It's only fun if someone (or lots of people) die by your every choice.

I say the next ME should just get rid of Paragon and Renegade and have EVERY action to cause a bad consequence somewhere else, as obviously, your choices won't matter in the end anyway. Kind of like Dragon Age 2, where no matter how you act or what you do, it all leads to the same outcome.

@Gweedotk: As long as they have choices, good and evil will usually always come into play (or Paragon and Renegade) unless they try really hard to make every choice completely grey, which is just as unrealistic as everything being black and white.

If you're not going to give people the freedom to play the role they want (Pure Paragon, Pure Renegade or somewhere in between), then there's no need to make choices available in the first place, as people will get upset that they can't put their own personality into it. Some like playing the heroic character, some like playing the magnificent bastard... a game with nothing but grey choices takes away any feeling that it's your character. Just make a linear story... you'll end up with more cohesion that way and a lot less disappointed players, because they don't feel like the character they've been building the whole time just got screwed.

Modifié par KLGChaos, 15 mars 2013 - 02:17 .

[IC-07]

Nah, let's keep the fairytale game a fairytale game. At least I can be good with no repercussions. We have The Witcher series for hard choices. And somewhat the Walking Dead..

[Gweedotk]

KLGChaos wrote...

If you're not going to give people the freedom to play the role they want (Pure Paragon, Pure Renegade or somewhere in between), then there's no need to make choices available in the first place, as people will get upset that they can't put their own personality into it.

...

Just make a linear story... you'll end up with more cohesion that way and a lot less disappointed players

On what basis do you make the claim that "a lot less" people will be unhappy if Bioware adopts a linear storyline and further limits player choice and personalization? I'd like to stress that creating a linear storyline is not a wise course of action for an RPG. As you yourself said, players want options- they want to be able to customize their gaming experience. That will be the strength of any future ME game. Removing it will not be popular.

I'd also like to point out that one cannot make morality grey. I'm not entirely sure what is meant by making choices "grey." If there is really no emotion involved in the making of the choice, the fault lies not in the choice itself but in the execution of atmosphere and plot. Giving players more choices in developing their character does not lead to emotional detachment of that character by virture of the choice itself.

When choosing between Ashley and Kaiden, there was clearly no morally right or wrong choice. The choice was made purely based on preferences and personal politics. Choosing between Nyreen or Aria would be based on the same, whichever one the player simply likes better. Such decisions do involve the player in gameplay and I would advocate a greater diversity of them as well as more throughout the next game.

IC-07 wrote...

Nah, let's keep the fairytale game a fairytale game. At least I can be good with no repercussions. We have The Witcher series for hard choices. And somewhat the Walking Dead..

This is the problem with trying to appeal to general audiences.

Modifié par Gweedotk, 15 mars 2013 - 05:22 .

[IC-07]

Gweedotk wrote...

IC-07 wrote...

Nah, let's keep the fairytale game a fairytale game. At least I can be good with no repercussions. We have The Witcher series for hard choices. And somewhat the Walking Dead..

This is the problem with trying to appeal to general audiences.

I kind of fail to see the problem in it. Can you specify? 

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

o Ventus wrote...

Doctor_Jackstraw wrote...

also, the pitch behind paragon and renegade wasn't "Good vs Evil"  Paragon is Spock, Renegade is Kirk.  Kirk isnt evil and spock isnt "always good", its just a set of principles.  paragon is idealism, while renegade is pragmatism.  thats not good and evil and its ****ty that ME2 boiled it down to a simplistic kotor style morality.  :/

Stopped reading right about here.

The overload of bulls*it nearly fried my head.

so the literal defenition of the words paragon and renegade is bull****?

man i bet you HATE dictionaries.

[Doctor_Jackstraw]

KLGChaos wrote...

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Right, the most complained about aspect of Me2 and Me3 is the lack of contrived sadistic choices (Virmire)

Well, the emo kiddies need something dark and dreary so they can have a reason to start cutting. It's only fun if someone (or lots of people) die by your every choice.

I say the next ME should just get rid of Paragon and Renegade and have EVERY action to cause a bad consequence somewhere else, as obviously, your choices won't matter in the end anyway. Kind of like Dragon Age 2, where no matter how you act or what you do, it all leads to the same outcome.

@Gweedotk: As long as they have choices, good and evil will usually always come into play (or Paragon and Renegade) unless they try really hard to make every choice completely grey, which is just as unrealistic as everything being black and white.

If you're not going to give people the freedom to play the role they want (Pure Paragon, Pure Renegade or somewhere in between), then there's no need to make choices available in the first place, as people will get upset that they can't put their own personality into it. Some like playing the heroic character, some like playing the magnificent bastard... a game with nothing but grey choices takes away any feeling that it's your character. Just make a linear story... you'll end up with more cohesion that way and a lot less disappointed players, because they don't feel like the character they've been building the whole time just got screwed.

choice isnt the same as control, realistic story telling isnt the same as "emo jeemo" and it isnt exclusive to happy endings.  what matters is if the happy ending doesnt feel like it was thrown in there clumsily, just like a sappy moment shouldnt feel ham fisted either. 

Samara shooting herself is the dumbest moment in ME3 because the logic of the characters and world dont really support it, and the solution is so simplistic and easy that it trivializes her entire character in an instant.  Its "tragic" for no reason and the personal conflict wasnt carried out with dignity and care.  the mission plays off better WITHOUT samara alive, and just shepard rolling up on this ardat yakshi monastary as he enters asari space (Monastary, then Thessia is as natural as doing the Cerberus Escapees mission before Sanctuary)


but no i guess that makes me a gothy teen with long black hair and nine inch nails playing in the background if i care about a story holding up to its own integral standards.  :/




The point is that the solution was too easy and causes conflicts with established characters.  It prioritizes one character above all others, Commander Shepard.  Tali's personality and Han'Gerril's personality have to bend and weave to allow for Shepard to "pull a trump card".  its that the METHOD is sloppy and ****ty, not the idea that geth and quarians could attain peace.  It RUINS the moment because they did it in a way that, if you stop and think about it, has serious flaws and "dumbing down characters who arent shepard"


and again i say, paragon and renegade dont mean good or evil.  the defenition of the words is as gray area as you can get.  They're about principles, not morality.  depending on the situation a renegade can be more "Good" than a paragon if you actually stick to the CONCEPT of the game, rather than relying on the "good vs evil" trope that the first game was trying to DISSOLVE.

Modifié par Doctor_Jackstraw, 20 mars 2013 - 12:01 .