359 réponses à ce sujet

[Fixers0]

CronoDragoon wrote...
I'm not sure what you mean by "dismissing" it. I'm simply saying there are better ways to do it.

But once again only if you consider quanity to be an issue alone.

CronoDragoon wrote...
If you get to the end of your story and find that one person is telling you virtually the entire backstory, then you have not done a good job planning your story.

I fail to see how having a single character providing a large amount of exposition is a sign of bad planning, there's absolutly no connection here.

[Jonata]

I know it's kinda odd to say this, but I loved the way the first Mass Effect went with armor and technology. The carbon-like N7 Armor of ME2 and ME3 are very cool, but those smooth, kinda "gum-like" armors from ME1 had a unique look that I just fell in love with... it reminded me of a toned-up Star Trek TOS, especially when you had your squad in bright, primary colors-themed armors.

Good times, indeed.

[CronoDragoon]

Fixers0 wrote...
I fail to see how having a single character providing a large amount of exposition is a sign of bad planning, there's absolutly no connection here.

For one thing, it's better to exposit major plot points in slices so the player has time to digest each point. For another thing, it's a prime example of telling and not showing, which is fundamentally less compelling for the person experiencing the story.

A relevant comparison is movies that have plot twists at the end; some throw in a recap of the whole movie so you can work out how it fits in, while others don't need it because they'd added the relevant plot points and foreshadowing earlier in the story for everything to automatically click. Guess which version screenwriters, critics, and directors praise?

[David7204]

And that does happen for Vigil. Feros, Noveria, and Virmire all provide a great deal of clues about what the Reapers are and how they work. Most of Vigil's exposition is bringing together all of that. And it works very well.

But it's not the same for the Reapers' motive.

[Fixers0]

CronoDragoon wrote...
For one thing, it's better to exposit major plot points in slices so the player has time to digest each point.

Unless the narrative doesn't allow for such form of exposition without creating major contrivances.

CronoDragoon wrote...
For another thing, it's a prime example of telling and not showing, which is fundamentally less compelling for the person experiencing the story.

Two points,first of all They're not mutally exclusive, and secondly, in certain narratives it might be more fitting to use words rather then visuals.

CronoDragoon wrote...
A relevant comparison is movies that have plot twists at the end; some throw in a recap of the whole movie so you can work out how it fits in, while others don't need it because they'd added the relevant plot points and foreshadowing earlier in the story for everything to automatically click. Guess which version screenwriters, critics, and directors praise?

False dillema.

[Exile Isan]

PSUHammer wrote...
Yeah, I always assumed he was fighting his way there like Shep.  CSec, and all.

Possibly, but Saren has already killed everyone in Citadel Control by the time Shepard even arrives at the Conduit. And chances are he just rode the elevator up to the Council Chambers, since it is only locked after Shepard tries to do the same thing. Shepard then has to fight across the outside of the Citadel Tower, against geth and Krogan. So why wouldn't Saren already be in the Council Chambers and turning over control of the station to Sovereign? The pacing just seems off to me.

Re: Vigil's placement in the narrative...I agree with the discussion taking place that it didn't make sense in the rush to catch Saren, to stop and chat.  Maybe if Vigil was earlier in the plot?  Or would that have spoiled too much story?

Maybe. I still think perhaps it would have been better to learn all of what you learn from Vigil slowly over the course of the game from different sources.

Sometimes I think people are blind to the flaws of Vigil's conversation because of how gorgeous the music is there.

[David7204]

As I said...you do...you DO learn about the Reapers slowly over the course of the game from different sources.

[CronoDragoon]

Fixers0 wrote...
Unless the narrative doesn't allow for such form of exposition without creating major contrivances.

What is it about the core plot of Mass Effect that precludes this form of exposition?

Let's also remember that major contrivances already drive the plot of Mass Effect. Saren's voice recording, for example.

Two points,first of all They're not mutally exclusive, and secondly, in certain narratives it might be more fitting to use words rather then visuals.

They actually are mutually exclusive when you are using the "show" and "tell" literary dichotomy. By "tell" I'm not condemning dialogue by itself; it's a form of exposition where it's either the author or a couple characters saying, "Well what about this?" "Oh, that's this." "And this?" "Oh, that's this."

I didn't mean to claim that plots should only be exposited using visuals.

False dillema.

False or not, it's the comparison used when they discuss good plot twists vs. bad ones.

[CronoDragoon]

David7204 wrote...

As I said...you do...you DO learn about the Reapers slowly over the course of the game from different sources.

Too slowly, and not enough compared to what you get at the end. It's the difference between eating chips for the entire game and getting a 5-course-meal crammed down your throat at the end, and having meals placed periodically through the game.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 10 avril 2013 - 08:47 .

[David7204]

Yeah...the content between Eden Prime and getting control of the Normandy is...pretty awful. I would scrap a great deal of it.

[David7204]

CronoDragoon wrote...

David7204 wrote...

As I said...you do...you DO learn about the Reapers slowly over the course of the game from different sources.

Too slowly, and not enough compared to what you get at the end. It's the difference between eating chips for the entire game and getting a 5-course-meal crammed down your throat at the end, and having meals placed periodically through the game.

What are you talking about? You learn the Reapers exist, and they're a hyperadvanced machine race. You learn a great deal about indoctrination. You learn that the Reapers erased evidence of previous cycles. You learn they intend to exterminate all advanced life in the galaxy. The only real new information Vigil gives you is about the Conduit and the Citadel as a trap.

[Fixers0]

CronoDragoon wrote...

What is it about the core plot of Mass Effect that precludes this form of exposition?

Well, um, the fact that Ilos was an isolated prothean Research world was more then enough to indicate that there was going to be recoverable information present on site.

CronoDragoon wrote...
They actually are mutually exclusive when you are using the "show" and "tell" literary dichotomy. By "tell" I'm not condemning dialogue by itself; it's a form of exposition where it's either the author or a couple characters saying, "Well what about this?" "Oh, that's this." "And this?" "Oh, that's this."

So what what was it's relevance again.

CronoDragoon wrote...
False or not, it's the comparison used when they discuss good plot twists vs. bad ones.

O, really where was that, since when were good and bad plot twists predefined and being judged soley on their scale?

Modifié par Fixers0, 10 avril 2013 - 08:57 .

[PSUHammer]

We should look at these discussions with the understanding that no game (or story, for that matter) is perfect. The designers are constrained by budgets, appealing to masses and technology. I appreciate what Bioware was able to accomplish with the entire series. There has been no other series that has intrigued me enough to replay and discuss a year after it concluded.

[CronoDragoon]

David7204 wrote...
What are you talking about? You learn the Reapers exist, and they're a hyperadvanced machine race. You learn a great deal about indoctrination. You learn that the Reapers erased evidence of previous cycles. You learn they intend to exterminate all advanced life in the galaxy. The only real new information Vigil gives you is about the Conduit and the Citadel as a trap.

The "only real new information" includes more dialogue than there was for everything you mentioned before combined, at a time when you're supposed to be racing towards the Conduit.

The entire relationship between the Citadel as a relay and the Keepers could have been developed before Ilos instead of merely being dumped. You can save why the Citadel is a trap to and why it's important to Sovereign until Ilos, since that info it makes sense for a Prothean to exposit.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 10 avril 2013 - 10:12 .

[Shad Croly]

Agreed, OP.

ME1 may have had a great story, but mechanically, it sucked. Hard.

[CronoDragoon]

Fixers0 wrote...
Well, um, the fact that Ilos was an isolated prothean Research world was more then enough to indicate that there was going to be recoverable information present on site.

Sure. Now I'll ask again, what about ME's plot precludes more of the info dump at the end from being shifted to earlier in the game?

So what what was it's relevance again.

The relevance of the show vs. tell dichotomy? One takes actual work and planning and is more rewarding, the other is lazy and results in uneven plots. Even occasionally boredom, though probably not in this case.

O, really where was that, since when were good and bad plot twists predefined and being judged soley on their scale?

The scale makes sense because the more work the player/reader/viewer does in his/her head connecting the dots, the more involved they are in the story and the more revelatory plot points feel.

Are you saying you disagree with this scale?

[robertthebard]

CronoDragoon wrote...

Fixers0 wrote...
Well, um, the fact that Ilos was an isolated prothean Research world was more then enough to indicate that there was going to be recoverable information present on site.

Sure. Now I'll ask again, what about ME's plot precludes more of the info dump at the end from being shifted to earlier in the game?

So what what was it's relevance again.

The relevance of the show vs. tell dichotomy? One takes actual work and planning and is more rewarding, the other is lazy and results in uneven plots. Even occasionally boredom, though probably not in this case.

O, really where was that, since when were good and bad plot twists predefined and being judged soley on their scale?

The scale makes sense because the more work the player/reader/viewer does in his/her head connecting the dots, the more involved they are in the story and the more revelatory plot points feel.

Are you saying you disagree with this scale?

I'll bite.  Vigil wasn't distributed anywhere else, or Ilos couldn't be very secret?  This is where the work was done constructing the Conduit, and so, there would be no information about it anywhere else, since they were cut off from the rest of the Prothean Empire.  It's really very simple, and very well explained, in ME 1.

[CronoDragoon]

robertthebard wrote...

I'll bite.  Vigil wasn't distributed anywhere else, or Ilos couldn't be very secret?  This is where the work was done constructing the Conduit, and so, there would be no information about it anywhere else, since they were cut off from the rest of the Prothean Empire.  It's really very simple, and very well explained, in ME 1.

There's other ways to exposit the information Vigil has. Some stuff you can save for Vigil at the end if you want (it makes sense to save information about the Conduit for Ilos, since that's where it is and was constructed) but there's plenty that doesn't *need* to be saved for Vigil, or at the least would have benefited from more spaced-out revelation. One example is the role of the Keepers, which is an uncompelling plot twist due to a lack of foreshadowing.

[Manimal]

Megaton_Hope wrote...

Why would anybody prefer the Mako? Crawling all over (the many) craggy, impassable mountains is terrible. The Hammerhead's ability to boost into the air is far superior to the Mako's weird floating five feet off the ground mode, which rarely even frees you from the many obstacles on which you can become stuck.

Not a big fan of combat in the Hammerhead, but for overland travel, it's great.

The Mako was all about exploration, and just about every one of those mountains is passable if you either find the right foot(wheel)hold or learn how to be a little more creative with the "weird floating five feet off the ground mode," as you call it.  Not to mention...wheels will always be more fun than just hovering.  If you can hover, then why not just fly, and if you can fly, then why not just take the damn shuttle.  I would rather storm a thousand identical strongholds, blasting my way through their outer defenses with the Mako's cannon, than get dropped off at the front door like a chump in the shuttle.  Call me Six Wheel Shepard.

Modifié par Manimal, 11 avril 2013 - 12:11 .

[robertthebard]

CronoDragoon wrote...

robertthebard wrote...

I'll bite.  Vigil wasn't distributed anywhere else, or Ilos couldn't be very secret?  This is where the work was done constructing the Conduit, and so, there would be no information about it anywhere else, since they were cut off from the rest of the Prothean Empire.  It's really very simple, and very well explained, in ME 1.

There's other ways to exposit the information Vigil has. Some stuff you can save for Vigil at the end if you want (it makes sense to save information about the Conduit for Ilos, since that's where it is and was constructed) but there's plenty that doesn't *need* to be saved for Vigil, or at the least would have benefited from more spaced-out revelation. One example is the role of the Keepers, which is an uncompelling plot twist due to a lack of foreshadowing.

Once you start seeding the galaxy with Vigil's intel, there won't be an Ilos for us to find.  This is all explained in ME 1, by Vigil.  So, 1 piece of information could have been discerned from somewhere else?  The rest of what Vigil talks about we either already know, talk about the cycles, or stuff that wouldn't be safe to have around anywhere else.  So we can cut one line from Vigil, about the Keepers, er, what difference would that make?

[PSUHammer]

Singularity - ME1 > ME2 > ME3

[PSUHammer]

Manimal wrote...

Megaton_Hope wrote...

Why would anybody prefer the Mako? Crawling all over (the many) craggy, impassable mountains is terrible. The Hammerhead's ability to boost into the air is far superior to the Mako's weird floating five feet off the ground mode, which rarely even frees you from the many obstacles on which you can become stuck.

Not a big fan of combat in the Hammerhead, but for overland travel, it's great.

The Mako was all about exploration, and just about every one of those mountains is passable if you either find the right foot(wheel)hold or learn how to be a little more creative with the "weird floating five feet off the ground mode," as you call it.  Not to mention...wheels will always be more fun than just hovering.  If you can hover, then why not just fly, and if you can fly, then why not just take the damn shuttle.  I would rather storm a thousand identical strongholds, blasting my way through their outer defenses with the Mako's cannon, than get dropped off at the front door like a chump in the shuttle.  Call me Six Wheel Shepard.

Well...if the Mako stuff is repetative and kind of boring, I will take a well designed level that starts in a "Drop off" at the back door.

[Getorex]

PSUHammer wrote...

David7204 wrote...

No, it really doesn't. There are any number of reasons why Saren could have been slowed down. Besides, he's already there when Shepard reaches the Council chambers. I don't remember anything suggesting Shepard got there right after him.

Yeah, I always assumed he was fighting his way there like Shep.  CSec, and all.

Re: Vigil's placement in the narrative...I agree with the discussion taking place that it didn't make sense in the rush to catch Saren, to stop and chat.  Maybe if Vigil was earlier in the plot?  Or would that have spoiled too much story?

Stop and chat wasn't really voluntary, remember.  Shepard didn't stop and think, "Hey, I think I'd like to chat this Vigil up."  They were blocked and funneled to Vigil by Vigil.  They couldn't rush onward to find the Conduit no matter how pressed for time they felt.

[Getorex]

PSUHammer wrote...

Manimal wrote...

Megaton_Hope wrote...

Why would anybody prefer the Mako? Crawling all over (the many) craggy, impassable mountains is terrible. The Hammerhead's ability to boost into the air is far superior to the Mako's weird floating five feet off the ground mode, which rarely even frees you from the many obstacles on which you can become stuck.

Not a big fan of combat in the Hammerhead, but for overland travel, it's great.

The Mako was all about exploration, and just about every one of those mountains is passable if you either find the right foot(wheel)hold or learn how to be a little more creative with the "weird floating five feet off the ground mode," as you call it.  Not to mention...wheels will always be more fun than just hovering.  If you can hover, then why not just fly, and if you can fly, then why not just take the damn shuttle.  I would rather storm a thousand identical strongholds, blasting my way through their outer defenses with the Mako's cannon, than get dropped off at the front door like a chump in the shuttle.  Call me Six Wheel Shepard.

Well...if the Mako stuff is repetative and kind of boring, I will take a well designed level that starts in a "Drop off" at the back door.

I'd have liked to split the difference somewhat.  Sometimes I would explore some planet, find some artifact or debris and not (yet) have the tech skill to open it.  I'd leave and SOMETIMES go back later to try again...but you always landed at the same original spot and had to trudge all the way across the surface to find the bit of debris again.  I'd have prefered to be presented the map and be able to pick a drop point.  On a unexplored planet I would pick some spot conveniently located roughly equidistant to a bunch of interesting sites, or close to a base and then leave the driving to the rest after I finished with the base. 

[KingZayd]

David7204 wrote...

I don't why that's a problem at all. Why is it a problem having the Reaper backstory and motive explained in a single conversation?

When the ending is improved by removing the conversation, there is a problem.