790 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

 These little pseudo-arguments of yours trying to prove how every character you don't like is pointless are tedious and pointless themselves.

I don't like EDI but I do not deny her importance, I don't like Legion/Geth VI much either, but I don't try and say he is pointless.


Oh and I like James, I just find him unnecessary.

[David7204]

We're done here. You're boring me immensely. Neither I nor BioWare have to justify characters to you.

And if you liked James, then he clearly served a purpose, didn't he?

Modifié par David7204, 09 août 2013 - 08:01 .

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

We're done here. You're boring me immensely. Neither I nor BioWare have to justify characters to you.

So you have no evidence to defend your position?

[o Ventus]

David7204 wrote...

No, you're just avoiding the obvious answer out of what I suspect is distaste for James.

That must be it. I don't like James, therefore I question his importance to the plot (and not just Leviathan). You got me. /armchair psychologist

I like Garrus, yet I also question his importance to the plot. He doesn't offer anything to the narrative either in any of the 3 games. Is that a paradox?

[David7204]

It's not a paradox, but it's rather foolish. And hypocrisy, if you're claiming this supposed 'lack of importance' as a fault against James and not Garrus.

Nearly all side characters in every story in existence could be removed or reduced without the story being significantly affected. The quality of a character is not dependent on how much they move the 'main plot' along.

Modifié par David7204, 09 août 2013 - 08:09 .

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

It's not a paradox, but it's rather foolish. And hypocrisy, if you're claiming this supposed 'lack of importance' as a fault against James and not Garrus.

Nearly all side characters in every story in existence could be removed or reduced without the story being significantly affected. The quality of a character is not dependent on how much they move the 'main plot' along.

Neither James nor Garrus are side characters.


Moving the goalposts

[David7204]

They are side characters.

[David7204]

That's too bad. I'm sorry, is this petty debate over semantics supposed to prove something to me?

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

That's too bad. I'm sorry, is this petty debate over semantics supposed to prove something to me?

This isn't a debate over semantics.  Garrus is important to one of the central themes of the series, Shiala is not.

[o Ventus]

David7204 wrote...

It's not a paradox, but it's rather foolish. And hypocrisy, if you're claiming this supposed 'lack of importance' as a fault against James and not Garrus.

Oh no, it's a fault of Garrus. And Thane. And Kasumi. And Zaeed. And Grunt. And Jack. And every other, frankly, pointless character (regardless of how much I like them). The only squad characters who are at all necessary in the entire trilogy are Liara, Shepard, Miranda, and Mordin.

Nearly all side characters in every story in existence could be removed or reduced without the story being significantly affected. The quality of a character is not dependent on how much they move the 'main plot' along.

Good thing I'm not arguing the quality of the characters. I'm not sure why you brought that up.

Modifié par o Ventus, 09 août 2013 - 08:21 .

[David7204]

There's no fault. They very clearly are not at all 'pointless' characters. Look at the romance forums. You very clearly have an immense amount of affection and attention focused on these characters.

The issue here is that you've decided to decide Mass Effect into two things. The conflict with the Reapers, and everything else. To you, anything that doesn't directly contribute to the Reapers is 'pointless.'

This of course is very baseless and contradictory. By that definition, any romance in any non-romance fiction is 'pointless.' Any friendships are 'pointless.' Really, any characters aside from the protagonist and antagonist are 'pointless.'

Modifié par David7204, 09 août 2013 - 08:29 .

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

There's no fault. They very clearly are not at all 'pointless' characters. Look at the romance forums. You very clearly have an immense amount of affection and attention focused on these characters.

The issue here is that you've decided to decide Mass Effect into two things. The conflict with the Reapers, and everything else. To you, anything that doesn't directly contribute to the Reapers is 'pointless.'

This of course is very baseless.

You can like a character but still acknowledge that they are pointless.

[o Ventus]

David7204 wrote...

There's no fault. They very clearly are not at all 'pointless' characters. Look at the romance forums. You very clearly have an immense amount of affection and attention focused on these characters.

The heavy majority of them serve no purpose in the narrative outside loyality missions. If they serve no purpose, they are, by definition, pointless.

[David7204]

They absolutely 'serve a purpose.' That purpose may simple not be advancing the Reaper conflict.

As long as they improve the story, they have a purpose.

Modifié par David7204, 09 août 2013 - 08:37 .

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

They absolutely 'serve a purpose.' That purpose may simple not be advancing the Reaper conflict.

What purpose to the narrative does Jacob serve then?

[Kataphrut94]

Perhaps I should clarify that by 'significant', I meant that he and EDI had slightly higher roles than the other squadmates in the Leviathan DLC, EDI moreso than James. Liara's role was equal to that of the other squadmates, in that she didn't do anything unique or have any involvement unless she was specifically chosen for a mission. Therefore, it was stupid for people to argue that she (Cortez too, but that's another story) was being 'forced' over the other characters, and hypocritical to shift the blame to EDI and James.

While James restraining Ann wasn't strictly crucial from a narrative standpoint, it was still an important part of the tension of the scene and allowed for some nice character moments between him and Ann that likely wouldn't be as effective if they were coming from EDI or Shepard.

You can argue about James' importance in the grand scheme of things if you like, in which case he is a critical character who, in the act of crashing a shuttle into a Cerberus agent escaping with the Crucible plans, may have inadvertently saved the entire galaxy. So there.

Modifié par Kataphrut94, 09 août 2013 - 09:05 .

[Dieb]

Kataphrut94 wrote...
You can argue about James' importance in the grand scheme of things if you like, in which case he is a critical character who, in the act of crashing a shuttle into a Cerberus agent escaping with the Crucible plans, may have inadvertently saved the entire galaxy. So there.

There. Thanks.

Actually, it was this scene I really started looking past my own obnoxious "...nyaarrr, new character for shooty-shooty stupidface new players, nyaaarrrr, disapproval..." and thought "Well, that may have been extremly stupid... but it was also really cool."

That, and like I mentioned before, him turning the scene with Ann into something more meaningful in his function as the "blue-eyed human element of doubt" does more than "justify" his appearance in the DLC. He just has plenty of moments over the entire game, if you look past the above mentioned, easily established prejudice.

Modifié par Baelrahn, 09 août 2013 - 09:03 .

[Bleachrude]

I actually disagree about that....and it somewhat relates to the Witcher.

People praise the witcher for its plot and one thing I definitely would say is that there is probably only 1 person not really connected to the plot that you interact with...

However, here's the funny thing...even with all the politics, I don't actually CARE what actually happens to the people of the world of the witcher since throughout the whole political stuff, the games never seem to actually bother as to why you as a player should care about your decisions....

Even though I have stated multiple times that Thane is useless and actively hurts your chance of completing the suicide mission, Thane ALSO is a prime example of why I think ME2 is the strongest in the series in making you actually CARE about how your decisions affect the world.

ME1 did a poor job of that and while ME3 was great, it still can't hold a candle to ME2 in that regard.

So...is Thane useless to the plot of the trilogy? Yes. Is he useless to ME2 plot? Hell Yes. Yet, I think Thane is essential to the ME experience.

There's also the issue that does a squadmate HAVE to be relevant to the plot of the game itself? Especially in such a large cast, it kind of would strain disbelief that everyone is connected to the main plot

[rashie]

Its obvious she have special feelings for shepard even if you do not romance her, its just how her character is written so obviously she will be flirting with you if you have not locked in on a romance with any other character. If you don't want this there are ways to avoid it by locking in on other people so its not really something worth complaining about.

[Ravensword]

Steelcan wrote...

David7204 wrote...

They absolutely 'serve a purpose.' That purpose may simple not be advancing the Reaper conflict.

What purpose to the narrative does Jacob serve then?

Two words: the priiize.

[OldSwede]

rashie wrote...

Its obvious she have special feelings for shepard even if you do not romance her, its just how her character is written so obviously she will be flirting with you if you have not locked in on a romance with any other character. If you don't want this there are ways to avoid it by locking in on other people so its not really something worth complaining about.

As an non-loving, non-hating, kind-of-neutral to Liara-person, I agree, in a way. On the other hand, if I do not want to romance anyone, I do not want her to be as pushy/flirty, which I feel she can be sometimes.

I (well, my femShep) consider her a good friend, and she should (in my humble opinion) after my playthroughs with her, also consider my Shepard a good friend.

Nothing more, nothing less.

edit: In ME1, she and my Shep agreed to be friends, and nothing else, so that's the way it should stay.

edit again: Then again, my feelings of her sometimes being too pushy/flirty (uncomfortable) may be becuase I, myself, is a heterosexual woman. I don't know - but it might have something to do with it.

I feel, if she has feelings for Shepard, and Shepard does not have the same feelings for her, then she should respect that -- as the good friend she is. ---OR, just stay away from Shepard (!) if it's so hard for her, just being friends. (LOL, sorry couldn't resist) :innocent:

Ravensword wrote...

Steelcan wrote...

What purpose to the narrative does Jacob serve then?

Two words: the priiize.

:lol:

Modifié par OldSwede, 09 août 2013 - 12:15 .

[Wynterdust]

Most of the characters serve a purpose in the game.
Shepard- If you don't know this one you should probably play the game again.
Liara- Recovers Shepards body and passes it to Cerberus. There's then discovering the location of the plans for the Crucible.
Mordin- Finding a way to defend against the seeker swarms.
Miranda/Jacob- Project Lazarus.
Tali- Has the data necessary to exposing Saren.
Ash/Kaidan and Wrex- Virmire. (Although Wrex's part isn't necessarily important considering he might not even be present.) Ash and Kaidan also have their part in the coup.
Garrus would probably come under the category of side character. Optional in ME1, serves only as a strong fire team leader in ME2 and in ME3 he might not even be present but serves as the one that Shepard can confide in, acting as a support character.
James, as said above is responsible for saving the Crucible data by crashing the shuttle.
EDI doesn't really need to be explained. That she becomes a squadmate is questionable but her overall character is quite necessary at many points.
Characters like Thane, Grunt, Samara, Legion, Jack are effectively side characters. Zaeed, Kasumi and Javik even more so.
Non squadmates like Shiala are minor side characters. The only relevant non squadmates are Anderson, Hackett, TIM, Udina, Joker, Traynor, Cortez and obviously the antagonists.

[rashie]

OldSwede wrote...

rashie wrote...

Its obvious she have special feelings for shepard even if you do not romance her, its just how her character is written so obviously she will be flirting with you if you have not locked in on a romance with any other character. If you don't want this there are ways to avoid it by locking in on other people so its not really something worth complaining about.

As an non-loving, non-hating, kind-of-neutral to Liara-person, I agree, in a way. On the other hand, if I do not want to romance anyone, I do not want her to be as pushy/flirty, which I feel she can be sometimes.

I (well, my femShep) consider her a good friend, and she should (in my humble opinion) after my playthroughs with her, also consider my Shepard a good friend.

Nothing more, nothing less.

edit: In ME1, she and my Shep agreed to be friends, and nothing else, so that's the way it should stay.

edit again: Then again, my feelings of her sometimes being too pushy/flirty (uncomfortable) may be becuase I, myself, is a heterosexual woman. I don't know - but it might have something to do with it.

I feel, if she has feelings for Shepard, and Shepard does not have the same feelings for her, then she should respect that -- as the good friend she is. ---OR, just stay away from Shepard (!) if it's so hard for her, just being friends. (LOL, sorry couldn't resist) :innocent:

I agree its a bit weird she flirts if you have told her off before but the game really can't know that based upon actions in ME1. Its fully possible to tell her to **** off in a blunt manner in ME1 and still romance her in ME3 if you so wish. The game can't know you have something against her without a certain romance option being locked in. Simply comes down to the game not being able to read the players mind there.

If your not engaged in a relationship with anybody at that point, someone liking you also making a move on you is not all that strange.

Modifié par rashie, 09 août 2013 - 04:55 .