583 réponses à ce sujet

[David7204]

'Even bigger problems'? Implying that that's somehow a problem in the first place?

[Fixers0]

RadicalDisconnect wrote...

I suppose you want a team that's as versatile as possible. It can be handwaved in any number of ways. I won't really delve into that, as there are even bigger problems with ME2's story.

It's a smaller issue that fits into the larger of picture of problems, see, no part of the ME2's narrative even asked why we need a team at al. Execpt for mordin, whos serves a clear purpose, all other characters are just along for the ride, they don't have another reason for being their other then TIM said so.

[David7204]

Gosh, you mean like 90% of all party members in video games? You mean like everyone but Liara and maybe Ashley and Kaidan in ME 1? You mean like everyone but Liara and EDI in ME 3?

And I really, really hope you aren't one of the people that have been complaining about not being able to kill or dismiss any squadmate at any time.

Modifié par David7204, 01 juin 2013 - 05:10 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

David7204 wrote...

'Even bigger problems'? Implying that that's somehow a problem in the first place?

I'd prefer we not go into that. But to name a few, Council suddenly going "Ah Reapers," Shepard somehow surviving atmospheric reentry, no explanations as to why "genetically diverse" humans are important, being very disconnected from ME1, trying to "stop the Collectors" without really much of a plan.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 01 juin 2013 - 05:15 .

[David7204]

What I meant was that you implied that having diverse squadmates is a 'big problem' in the first place. It isn't.

[Fixers0]

David7204 wrote...

Gosh, you mean like 90% of all party members in video games? You mean like everyone but Liara and maybe Ashley and Kaidan in ME 1? You mean like everyone but Liara and EDI in ME 3?

As long as the narrative can provide a sound justification for their appearance in the narrative it doesn't have to be a problem, the issue with Mass Effect 2 in particular, however is that the squadmates are all their is, and while they indvidually are mostly well executed, they utterly fail to be a convincing part of the plot.

Modifié par Fixers0, 01 juin 2013 - 05:18 .

[David7204]

Or perhaps you 'utterly failed' to realize they aren't meant to be a convincing plot? They're meant to be characters?

Modifié par David7204, 01 juin 2013 - 05:17 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

Okay, what the hell are you talking about? The problem isn't that there's a diverse squad roster, the problem is that the ME2 plot doesn't do enough to try to explain and justify why we needed certain members. All this is a part of a bigger problem, which is that "stopping the Collectors" plan didn't really have a plan. The "plan" boils down to going through Omega 4 and then waiting to see what happens. Yeah, some plan...

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 01 juin 2013 - 05:20 .

[Fixers0]

David7204 wrote...

Or perhaps you 'utterly failed' to realize they aren't meant to be a convincing plot? They're meant to be characters?

Going on personal attacks again, you never change. Say before I continue let me ask you a question. Why do you always feel the need to launch a personal attack on someone whenever you get in trouble?

That said, let's continue, Unfortunatly as i've said in the exact same post the Characters a pratically all there is, surely there is this quest to take on the collectors, but with the expection of their contrived apearances, wich only constitue about 15% of the game. there's litteraly nothing but "Shepard, go recruit some characters and deal with their issues."

Modifié par Fixers0, 01 juin 2013 - 05:24 .

[David7204]

They're capable, effective, skilled, and dedicated people willing to work for you for free. What more reason do you need?

[David7204]

Fixers0 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Or perhaps you 'utterly failed' to realize they aren't meant to be a convincing plot? They're meant to be characters?

Going on personal attacks again, you never change. Say before I continue let me ask you a question. Why do you always feel the need to launch a personal attack on someone whenever you get in trouble?

'Personal attacks'? What nonsense is that? I merely repeated the exact phrase you used.

Modifié par David7204, 01 juin 2013 - 05:25 .

[Fixers0]

David7204 wrote...

'Personal attacks'? What nonsense is that? I merely repeated the exact phrase you used. 

No, you start making unbased accusations on my person.

[RadicalDisconnect]

David7204 wrote...

They're capable, effective, skilled, and dedicated people willing to work for you for free. What more reason do you need?

If you are tasked with defeat a threat, then your first step should be to gather information to understand the threat, plan out how you want to defeat the threat, and then recruit people who can contribute to that plan. The game does not do a good job in allowing you to understand and plan for the threat.

We're getting completely off topic here, and that's just asking for a thread lock. In fact, a thread lock may be the best way to end this.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 01 juin 2013 - 05:34 .

[David7204]

"Unbased accusations on my person."

Yeah. Okay.

No, I didn't do that. I merely suggested you 'utterly failed' to recognize a certain point. Just as you suggested the game 'utterly failed' to provide something you expected.

[Fixers0]

David7204 wrote...
No, I didn't do that. I merely suggested you 'utterly failed' to recognize a certain point.

Yes you did, you made a statement that accused of having "utterly failed" to understand something you've made up.

David7204 wrote...
Just as you suggested the game 'utterly failed' to provide something you expected.

Did I ever spoke out my expectation of something? I can't remember, All is said was the cold fact that the narrative failed to intergrate the characters in a convincing manner into the plot.

[David7204]

I 'made up' the idea that characters are meant to be characters? Really now? That's an 'unbased accusation on my person.' I think you 'utterly failed' to account that it's a 'cold fact.'

[RadicalDisconnect]

Oh yeah, this discussion is really going somewhere...

I think the Hahne-Kedar armor set looks acceptable. Extra large should guards look a bit silly, but it's not that big of a deal.



Then again, other than lacking rigging and pouches to hold thermal clips, most of Shepard's armor look fairly sensible.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 01 juin 2013 - 05:58 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

David7204 wrote...

Gosh, you mean like 90% of all party members in video games? You mean like everyone but Liara and maybe Ashley and Kaidan in ME 1? You mean like everyone but Liara and EDI in ME 3?

The key point here being though that you don't go out of your way to recruit any of those characters (or in most Bioware games) for their awesomeness. Alot of them have some basic plot function to perform, then just come along for the ride. We get Liara for her Prothean expertise, you start off with Kaidan, Ashley is sort of dropped on you, Tali has evidence implicating Saren, either Garrus or Wrex is needed to get to Fist.

Most Bioware cast members are useless, they just happen to be really fun characters to interact with.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 01 juin 2013 - 05:56 .

[Fixers0]

David7204 wrote...

I 'made up' the idea that characters are meant to be characters? Really now? That's an 'unbased accusation on my person.' I think you 'utterly failed' to account that it's a 'cold fact.' 

Nope, wrong once again, i didn't believe reasoning could be so hard, but anyway let's try once it again, based upon a  post in which explained the simple fact that Mass Effect 2 poorly integrated it's character, you've ignored the content of my post and just made a unbased accuastions that i failed to understand what the characters were supposed to be, a totally irrelevant comment that i can only describe as a personal attack, but if you think you know it better, by all means explain to me what it was suspposed to be. 

Modifié par Fixers0, 01 juin 2013 - 05:57 .

[David7204]

The more active characters are in the main plot of a story, the more whining and complaining and shrieking you have when characters like Liara supposedly get 'too much screentime.' The less freedom you have to dismiss them, get them killed, or not recruit them in the first place. More active characters means much more mandatory content and conversation.

Modifié par David7204, 01 juin 2013 - 05:59 .

[RadicalDisconnect]

David7204 wrote...

The more active characters are in the main plot of a story, the more whining and complaining and shrieking you have when characters like Liara supposedly get 'too much screentime.' The less freedom you have to dismiss them, get them killed, or not recruit them in the first place. More active characters means much more mandatory content and conversation.

Complaints about Liara is due to perceived favortism and execution, which has nothing to do with being integral to the plot.

Modifié par RadicalDisconnect, 01 juin 2013 - 06:01 .

[David7204]

It has everything to do with being integral to the plot. Some players dislike Liara, but she has unavoidable content. Because she's integral to the plot. She has an impact on the story that some players would have preferred other characters had made. Because she's integral to the plot. She has a slot on the term that some players don't want her to have. Because she's integral to the plot.

If the problem was execution, Liara would not probably be overwhelmingly one of the most popular, if not the most popular characters in the entire story. If the problem was execution, it's a pretty incredible coincidence that the three squadmates most complained about in ME 3 are the three mandatory ones, wouldn't you say?

Modifié par David7204, 01 juin 2013 - 06:15 .

[BaladasDemnevanni]

David7204 wrote...

The more active characters are in the main plot of a story, the more whining and complaining and shrieking you have when characters like Liara supposedly get 'too much screentime.' The less freedom you have to dismiss them, get them killed, or not recruit them in the first place. More active characters means much more mandatory content and conversation.

The entire ME1 cast had a basic plot function. But ME1 could easily have been designed where you don't have to bring along Tali, Garrus, or Wrex after their respective roles are fulfilled.

The ME2 cast is much the same way, but we devote substantially more time and effort acquiring these characters, who don't have a connection to our goal. It's the difference between how you acquire Tali/Garrus/Samara/Jack/Thane vs. Legion. The first five you're grabbing for the hell of it. Legion however just falls into your lap while Shepard is doing something relevant to his goal.

The problem is not one of active vs. passive characters. The problem is we shouldn't be putting excess effort to acquire said passive characters.

Modifié par BaladasDemnevanni, 01 juin 2013 - 06:08 .

[MyChemicalBromance]

Yes, even to the point that they just used all the ME1 armors in combat.

I feel like, post ME1, no one was allowed to tell the art team "no, that's ****ing stupid, change it."

[tonnactus]

iakus wrote...

As long as she's not distracted, stunned, etc.

Barriers require concentration and effort.  Armor at least ahs to be shot away

And some Biotics in Mass Effect had not only armor, but also shields...