337 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

@David, so only arguments supported by the majority are valid?

[billy the squid]

o Ventus wrote...

"Something that is advantageous or good".

That's it. It's not strictly advantageous, it's his weekly paycheck.

Having money is generally advantageous.

[shingara]

billy the squid wrote...

shingara wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Payment is a personal gain, yes.

 So what is the characteristic to make one personal gain better or worse then another ?

What action did you perform to secure the personal gain. 

 What action defines it as a good or bad thing ?

[David7204]

billy the squid wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Actually that's pretty basic legal and ethical principles that are accepted basically everywhere.

Have you ever worked in or studied the legal sector? Because I have and its bloody well not. 

Its "guilty until proven inoccent", not "they didn't have to do it, so innocent"

You've already said he didn't have to, therefore he didn't do it. We'll just ignore the gaping logical chasm in that reasoning, considering he did do it. 

Really? And here I thought the principle was 'Innocent until proven guilty.'

Modifié par David7204, 12 août 2013 - 12:50 .

[The Heretic of Time]

o Ventus wrote...

"Something that is advantageous or good".

That's it. It's not strictly advantageous, it's his weekly paycheck.

Getting paid is not advantageous?

Look, you're cherry picking here. The definition (which I took from a dictionary) clearly also lists payment as being beneficial, e.g. a benefit. You can try to hide that fact by editing out that part that said that, but that only makes you a dishonest person.

You know, there is no shame in admitting you're wrong. It's a very manly thing to do in fact.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 12 août 2013 - 12:52 .

[Modius Prime]

I would want the old characters in the new game, but just in cameos... Maybe in a DLC so that it doesn't detract from the intended narrative, I don't know. I know Liara, for sure, is going to be in the next game; after all, she's the Shadowbroker and somebody is going to try to throw her out of business. It's hard to let go, but BioWare needs to move on and make new characters with new stories. If they can make people like Shepard and his squad, imagine what else they have in mind for the new game?

[David7204]

Steelcan wrote...

@David, so only arguments supported by the majority are valid?

This originally started as me arguing that people liked the characters in Mass Effect because they were basically powerful and good. So in this case it does.

[billy the squid]

David7204 wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Actually that's pretty basic legal and ethical principles that are accepted basically everywhere.

Have you ever worked in or studied the legal sector? Because I have and its bloody well not. 

Its "guilty until proven inoccent", not "they didn't have to do it, so innocent"

You've already said he didn't have to, therefore he didn't do it. We'll just ignore the gaping logical chasm in that reasoning, considering he did do it. 

Really? And here I thought the principle was 'Innocent until proven guilty.'

Apologise its 2am here. 

And inoccent until proven guilt still hasn't changed the situation from the action being disregarded because they may not have done it in another instance.

[o Ventus]

billy the squid wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

"Something that is advantageous or good".

That's it. It's not strictly advantageous, it's his weekly paycheck.

Having money is generally advantageous.

Having a sustainable income (where what you make outweighs what you need), certainly. If you're breaking even or not making enough, it isn't.

Modifié par o Ventus, 12 août 2013 - 12:53 .

[Mcfly616]

David7204 wrote...

Really? And here I thought the principle was 'Innocent until proven guilty.'

well, not if you're talking about the court of public opinion. Ofcourse the media propaganda in this country doesn't help with that...

[billy the squid]

o Ventus wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

o Ventus wrote...

"Something that is advantageous or good".

That's it. It's not strictly advantageous, it's his weekly paycheck.

Having money is generally advantageous.

Having a sustainable income (where what you make outweighs what you need), certainly. If you're breaking even or not making enough, it isn't.

So having money is not advantageous compared to someone who has none?

[billy the squid]

shingara wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

shingara wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Payment is a personal gain, yes.

 So what is the characteristic to make one personal gain better or worse then another ?

What action did you perform to secure the personal gain. 

 What action defines it as a good or bad thing ?

Do I look like an encyclopedia?

[David7204]

billy the squid wrote...

And inoccent until proven guilt still hasn't changed the situation from the action being disregarded because they may not have done it in another instance.

I'm not disregarding it. In fact, that's the entire point. Yes, the player can have some of the squadmates do awful things, but that doesn't mean the squadmates are necessarily awful because of it. It works both ways. And not only do players overwhelmingly pick the 'good' options, but the story generally supports them. Which feeds into my argument of why people enjoy the characters in the first place.

Modifié par David7204, 12 août 2013 - 12:57 .

[o Ventus]

billy the squid wrote...

So having money is not advantageous compared to someone who has none?

If you're breaking even, you're broke. If you aren't making enough, you're in debt.

[shingara]

billy the squid wrote...

Do I look like an encyclopedia?

 No idea, i cannot see you.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

If any character pulled out a gun and shot dead a clearly innocent person for no reason or for a really stupid reason, I can assure you they would quickly move to the bottom of the popularity list.

 

The hell they would. If Wrex did that, his badass level would go through the roof. Depending on how he did it, it'd be funny as hell.

Or at he very least would be considered a very, very serious scar on an otherwise well-written character. We'd of course have a few people giggling over it in gleeful approval and some pseudo-arguments trying to justify such a thing, but that happens regardless, and thus doesn't really count for anything. 

You just disregarded opinions based on the fact that they don't agree with yours.

David:

You aren't god. You don't know everything. Your opinions are not 'the' opinions.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 12 août 2013 - 12:57 .

[David7204]

It's 'badass' to kill innocent people?

[Sir DeLoria]

billy the squid wrote...

Do I look like an encyclopedia?

Well, now that you mention it...

[MassivelyEffective0730]

o Ventus wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

So having money is not advantageous compared to someone who has none?

If you're breaking even, you're broke. If you aren't making enough, you're in debt.

Payment is a personal gain, whether it covers your expenses or not. 

You're still gaining something. You're still receiving a benefit. 

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 12 août 2013 - 12:59 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

It's 'badass' to kill innocent people?

Is it badass to be a white-knight paragon of justice and goodness?

Badass doesn't always have to be good.

Tarkin is a badass. He doesn't take **** from Leia and blows up her planet to prove to her he's not kidding or pissing around.

That's pretty badass.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 12 août 2013 - 01:02 .

[o Ventus]

David7204 wrote...

It's 'badass' to kill innocent people?

It can be.

Like in the first Spider-Man movie, when the Green Goblin throws a pumpkin grenade at a group of people and it incinerates the flesh from their skeletons. That was pretty awesome.

[billy the squid]

David7204 wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

And inoccent until proven guilt still hasn't changed the situation from the action being disregarded because they may not have done it in another instance.

I'm not disregarding it. In fact, that's the entire point. Yes, the player can have some of the squadmates do awful things, but that doesn't mean the squadmates are necessarily awful because of it. It works both ways. And not only do players overwhelmingly pick the 'good' options, but the story generally supports them.

So other than "my point is valid, because I said so" you've got nothing. I don't make Zaeed leave them, he's already willing to do that. You've disregarded the basic premise of law, being judged on actions, not because he might not have done it, therefore he can't possibly lack "Heroism"

This is also ignoring the fact that Zaeed is a mercenary who kills people for money.

[Sir DeLoria]

David7204 wrote...

It's 'badass' to kill innocent people?

Hollywood seems to think so. Massively as well apparently, now I know where he got his opinion on the Quarians.

[o Ventus]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Payment is a personal gain, whether it covers your expenses or not. 

You're still gaining something. You're still receiving a benefit.

I don't see it as a benefit if you aren't able to do anything with it.

Like if I was given a working Audi LMS prototype. That would be amazing, but I wouldn't be able to drive it anywhere in this country, because it wouldn't be legal. Not much of a "benefit" to having a totally badass car if you can't drive it.

Modifié par o Ventus, 12 août 2013 - 01:02 .

[shingara]

billy the squid wrote...

David7204 wrote...

billy the squid wrote...

And inoccent until proven guilt still hasn't changed the situation from the action being disregarded because they may not have done it in another instance.

I'm not disregarding it. In fact, that's the entire point. Yes, the player can have some of the squadmates do awful things, but that doesn't mean the squadmates are necessarily awful because of it. It works both ways. And not only do players overwhelmingly pick the 'good' options, but the story generally supports them.

So other than "my point is valid, because I said so" you've got nothing. I don't make Zaeed leave them, he's already willing to do that. You've disregarded the basic premise of law, being judged on actions, not because he might not have done it, therefore he can't possibly lack "Heroism"

This is also ignoring the fact that Zaeed is a mercenary who kills people for money.

 So what makes zaeed different to someone in the militery ?