217 réponses à ce sujet

[PHGDAL]

dreamgazer wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

chemiclord wrote...

This damn question is pretty easily answered:

The Catalyst is still there because the Bioware writing team doesn't want to remove it. Their story, their rules. You don't like it? Too bad.

Unfortnetly this statement is a betrayal of everything mass effect was.

It was always their story. You just had a (small) hand in how it looked.

It was actually Karpyshyn's story. And I'm sorry, I'm all for artistic integrity. But Mass Effect 3 was not art. ME1 and 2 were art. ME3 was missing so much. I only play the game for the Tuchanka and Rannoch missions because of this. Every other time I'm on ME1 and 2.

[FlamingBoy]

dreamgazer wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

chemiclord wrote...

This damn question is pretty easily answered:

The Catalyst is still there because the Bioware writing team doesn't want to remove it. Their story, their rules. You don't like it? Too bad.

Unfortnetly this statement is a betrayal of everything mass effect was.

It was always their story. You just had a (small) hand in how it looked.

Well that is pretty debateable, I mean the seriouly they marketed on the fact that its "your story" destorying the preconcived notion that it was biowares story. They tossed this notion away to market and sell there game better. They sold the game on the fact of players agency hence as a result saying that bioware funneling you down a corridor is ok mean that its a betrayal of mass effect as a series.

Edited for poor spelling and grammar

Modifié par FlamingBoy, 18 juin 2013 - 01:41 .

[Clayless]

FlamingBoy wrote...

If you type writing that directly disagrees me despite it what was written before it becomes relevant .

If you had said "this is not relevant to what I was saying" that would be fine, but you typed that after. You typed "That sitll not a plothole" Hence the cycle continues .

There's no cycle, it's not a matter of opinion. Disagreeing with objectivity, and quoting my posts without saying anything relevant to them, is why I said you shouldn't quote my posts.

[dreamgazer]

Plenty of people say ME2 is garbage. Plenty of people say ME1 is tedious and boring. Are they still art?

Anyway, when exactly did BioWare specifically say "Mass Effect 3 is art"?

[Ticonderoga117]

Robosexual wrote...
Unless the relay is dormant and one way, similar to the Omega 4.

And, as seen from the Mass Effect Trilogy, the Reaper cycle doesn't hinge on people not looking too deep into the Citadel, as they win unless the Crucible is used, despite the fact their plans were sabotaged many times.

Relays can be turned on and can't be one way. If it was one way, you wouldn't be able to get back.

And Vigil speculates that the Reaper's go dormant while in dark space, so they most likely wouldn't win. Another case could be that the Galaxy then finds out about the Reapers early, clogs the relay, and then get's thier act together to curb stomp the Reapers. Even if they don't, there would be more warning signs for later cycles because THEY KNEW before the Reapers completely collapsed the governments and FTL travel.

Our cycle only had it's chance because a group of Prothean scientists got extrmemly lucky and managed to disable the activation process (Which a Super AI housed in the Citadel should be able to fix no problem!).

[David7204]

All of those scenarios would make really crappy stories and are thus unacceptable.

Modifié par David7204, 18 juin 2013 - 01:51 .

[FlamingBoy]

dreamgazer wrote...

Plenty of people say ME2 is garbage. Plenty of people say ME1 is tedious and boring. Are they still art?

Anyway, when exactly did BioWare specifically say "Mass Effect 3 is art"?

Ray muzyka and his business partner (greg something) did a presention using a couple years back saying "video games are art".


Also muzyka used the term artistic integrity (or vision ) during the annoucement of extended cut as well as saying me3 was the best game bioware crafted implying that it was art.
Finally
"I believe passionately that games are an art form"- Ray muzyka
all of this is found in the blog below.
http://blog.bioware....012/03/21/4108/

[dreamgazer]

FlamingBoy wrote...

Well that is pretty debateable, I mean the seriouly they marketed on the fact that its "your story" destorying the preconcived notion that it was biowares story. They tossed this notion away to market and sell there game better. They sold the game on the fact of players agency hence as a result saying that bioware funneling you down a corridor is ok mean that its a betrayal of mass effect as a series.

Edited for poor spelling and grammar

Yeah, it's your tailored version of their story.

Could you choose to not be a member of the Alliance? Could you choose to not become a Spectre? Could you choose to not go to Virmire and kill either Kaidan or Ashley, or could you send one of your other squad members to do their tasks? Could you avoid killing either the Council or human troops during the Citadel decision?

Modifié par dreamgazer, 18 juin 2013 - 02:02 .

[FlamingBoy]

We’re working hard to maintain the right balance between the artistic integrity of the original story while addressing the fan feedback we’ve received- ray muzkya

Found it!! this is also in the blog.

[Ticonderoga117]

dreamgazer wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

Well that is pretty debateable, I mean the seriouly they marketed on the fact that its "your story" destorying the preconcived notion that it was biowares story. They tossed this notion away to market and sell there game better. They sold the game on the fact of players agency hence as a result saying that bioware funneling you down a corridor is ok mean that its a betrayal of mass effect as a series.

Edited for poor spelling and grammar

Yeah, it's your tailored version of their story.

Could you choose to not be a member of the Alliance? Could you choose to not become a Spectre? Could you choose to not go to Virmire and kill either Kaiden or Ashley, or could you send one of your other squad members to do their tasks? Could you avoid killing either the Council or human troops during the Citadel decision?

But even the choices they give you, are completely ignored.

Udina is always the Councilor in the end, and TIM magically get's indoctrination tech from the inside of the Galactic center that requires the IFF of a Reaper that only EDI and the Reaper IFF can provide.

Someone really needs to explain the last one.

[dreamgazer]

FlamingBoy wrote...


Ray muzyka and his business partner (greg something) did a presention using a couple years back saying "video games are art".


Also muzyka used the term artistic integrity (or vision ) during the annoucement of extended cut as well as saying me3 was the best game bioware crafted implying that it was art.
Finally
"I believe passionately that games are an art form"- Ray muzyka
all of this is found in the blog below.
http://blog.bioware....012/03/21/4108/

Right. They defend making video games as an artform, as they should.

[Clayless]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

Robosexual wrote...
Unless the relay is dormant and one way, similar to the Omega 4.

And, as seen from the Mass Effect Trilogy, the Reaper cycle doesn't hinge on people not looking too deep into the Citadel, as they win unless the Crucible is used, despite the fact their plans were sabotaged many times.

Relays can be turned on and can't be one way. If it was one way, you wouldn't be able to get back.

And Vigil speculates that the Reaper's go dormant while in dark space, so they most likely wouldn't win. Another case could be that the Galaxy then finds out about the Reapers early, clogs the relay, and then get's thier act together to curb stomp the Reapers. Even if they don't, there would be more warning signs for later cycles because THEY KNEW before the Reapers completely collapsed the governments and FTL travel.

Our cycle only had it's chance because a group of Prothean scientists got extrmemly lucky and managed to disable the activation process (Which a Super AI housed in the Citadel should be able to fix no problem!).

There's a lot you say in this post but it's late so I'll just address the main point:

None of that means their plan hinges on people not studying the Citadel too closely. All of what you said relies on studying the Citadel incredibly closely and then a lot of luck and what ifs, and the Reapers sleeping through their destruction.

As we saw from the trilogy, discovering the existence of the Reapers doesn't do anything unless you have the Crucible.

[FlamingBoy]

dreamgazer wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

Well that is pretty debateable, I mean the seriouly they marketed on the fact that its "your story" destorying the preconcived notion that it was biowares story. They tossed this notion away to market and sell there game better. They sold the game on the fact of players agency hence as a result saying that bioware funneling you down a corridor is ok mean that its a betrayal of mass effect as a series.

Edited for poor spelling and grammar

Yeah, it's your tailored version of their story.

Could you choose to not be a member of the Alliance? Could you choose to not become a Spectre? Could you choose to not go to Virmire and kill either Kaiden or Ashley, or could you send one of your other squad members to do their tasks? Could you avoid killing either the Council or human troops during the Citadel decision?

Your thinking walking dead by telltale, they used the word "tailored". Mass Effect sold on the phrase "this is your story" or "completely change the outcome" there is a difference.

You bring up mass effect 1 and 2 thats fair enough, its also a run down the corridor experience. The difference was bioware always implied that the choices you made in the previous games would have drastic effects on the final instalment. Now we all know this was a false hood and in many ways the entire series was sold on a lie.

But that does not diminish the fact that mass effect 1 and 2 was setting the stage for that final promise. As evidenced below.
http://au.ign.com/ar...o-mass-effect-3

[Ticonderoga117]

Robosexual wrote...
There's a lot you say in this post but it's late so I'll just address the main point:

None of that means their plan hinges on people not studying the Citadel too closely. All of what you said relies on studying the Citadel incredibly closely and then a lot of luck and what ifs, and the Reapers sleeping through their destruction.

As we saw from the trilogy, discovering the existence of the Reapers doesn't do anything unless you have the Crucible.

As compared to building a giant battery to power a device that can completely re-write the Galaxy? Oh, and then REWRITE bits of the super-AI that controls the entire Citadel and the Reaper fleet?

*headdesk*

I think the giant mass relay would be a bit easier to spot!

[dreamgazer]

FlamingBoy wrote...

We’re working hard to maintain the right balance between the artistic integrity of the original story while addressing the fan feedback we’ve received- ray muzkya

Found it!! this is also in the blog.

"Artistic integrity of the original story" =/= "Mass Effect 3 is art, and therefore untouchable."

[FlamingBoy]

dreamgazer wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...


Ray muzyka and his business partner (greg something) did a presention using a couple years back saying "video games are art".


Also muzyka used the term artistic integrity (or vision ) during the annoucement of extended cut as well as saying me3 was the best game bioware crafted implying that it was art.
Finally
"I believe passionately that games are an art form"- Ray muzyka
all of this is found in the blog below.
http://blog.bioware....012/03/21/4108/

Right. They defend making video games as an artform, as they should.

I personally thought defending videogames as an artform was inappropriate for the crisis they were dealing with.

but hey thats just me.

[FlamingBoy]

dreamgazer wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

We’re working hard to maintain the right balance between the artistic integrity of the original story while addressing the fan feedback we’ve received- ray muzkya

Found it!! this is also in the blog.

"Artistic integrity of the original story" =/= "Mass Effect 3 is art, and therefore untouchable."

It implies it...

and as evidence by previous quotes it is more than enough.

[dreamgazer]

Well, you can't really argue against someone's interpretation of what was "implied", now can you?

[FlamingBoy]

dreamgazer wrote...

Well, you can't really argue against someone's interpretation of what was "implied", now can you?

Well if you cannot see how a reasonable person came to that conclusion as evidenced by the blog.. I not sure what to tell you.

In the extended cut announcement is says the word art upwards of 3 to 4 times. Its reasonable for a rational person to come to that conclusion. You do not have to agree but you should be able to see how some one came to that conclusion.

Edited for bad grammar again, also edited for poorly chosen words that made it appear I was saying dreamgazer was "unrational" this was not the intention.

Modifié par FlamingBoy, 18 juin 2013 - 02:08 .

[dreamgazer]

FlamingBoy wrote...

I personally thought defending videogames as an artform was inappropriate for the crisis they were dealing with.

but hey thats just me.

They didn't do that, though.

They were simply talking about the creator's intended vision, and not wanting to change that.

[FlamingBoy]

dreamgazer wrote...

FlamingBoy wrote...

I personally thought defending videogames as an artform was inappropriate for the crisis they were dealing with.

but hey thats just me.

They didn't do that, though.

They were simply talking about the creator's intended vision, and not wanting to change that.

This is becoming circular, if you wish to back to creators vision which is another word for artistic integrity, keep the quote piramids so I don't have to rewrite the same thing.

[dreamgazer]

You're right: it is circular, as it has been since last year.

But supporting the original intention of a creation isn't the same thing as hiding behind "video games are art". They simply didn't want to change the base idea, even though they did make some modifications based on fan feedback.

[FlamingBoy]

Hiding behind the "original intention of the creation" is the art argument, its the whole the artists creation is sacred. Its just a different way of saying it but its the exact same thing.

[AlanC9]

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

How can you change what you don't know? The whole Reaper cycle thing hinges on the idea that no one ever looks too deep into the Citadel. How can you build something to work with that? 

Where was this argument when ME1 came out?

[FlamingBoy]

AlanC9 wrote...

Ticonderoga117 wrote...

How can you change what you don't know? The whole Reaper cycle thing hinges on the idea that no one ever looks too deep into the Citadel. How can you build something to work with that? 

Where was this argument when ME1 came out?

You have a point, but me 1 had sequels hence the burden of explaining stuff was put on me3.

I recently posted an ign article of me1 and 2 being the "preamble" hence it was implied this question would be answered.

Edit: yes I feel dirty for going to ign

Modifié par FlamingBoy, 18 juin 2013 - 02:25 .