337 réponses à ce sujet

[David7204]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

You're assuming that all the characters in Mass Effect are the same. They're not. 

You're assuming that all of our Shepard's our the same. They're not.

I know there's not a single character in the game that kills or has killed innocent people for their personal benefit.

[David7204]

Lizardviking wrote...

Do we really need a great conflict in order to have a meaningful story?

Yes.

[Seival]

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

Destroy itself might not be the case in case of sequel. So, you should be ready for anything.

Practice what you preach Seival

Hmm... Can you imagine sequel based on Refusal ending?

Shepard refused, and died. You are playing during the next Cycle that failed to understand the threat of the Reapers, just like all previous Cycles. You have to build the Crucible, and talk to the Catalyst again... Next Cycle might be quite exotic I believe. And there will be no Destroy option this time.

Are you ready for such ways of expanding MEU? I am.

Modifié par Seival, 11 août 2013 - 09:59 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

The content would exist. It's not reliant on the Reapers. You're saying that good content and the Reapers are mutually exclusive.

You can have incredibly difficult time with simple logic, don't you? Clearly, looking at all those little phrases on Wikipedia hasn't done much at all for you.

Please explain to me how in the hell saying "content people find meaningful in Mass Effect wouldn't exist without a threat such as the Reapers" means "good content and the Reapers are mutually exclusive."

I don't have to explain anything against a personal attack. Reported.

[Mr.House]

David7204 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

Do we really need a great conflict in order to have a meaningful story?

Yes.

LoU had a meaningful story and was not about a great conflict. Try again.

[Fixers0]

Seival wrote...
Shepard refused, and you are playing during the next Cycle that failed to understand the threat of the Reapers, just like all previous Cycles. You have to build the Crucible, and talk to the Catalyst again... Next Cycle might be quite exotic I believe. And there will be no Destroy option this time.

What's the point of the Crucible if it doesn't stop the Reapers? Not that it ever made sense.

[AresKeith]

Seival wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

Destroy itself might not be the case in case of sequel. So, you should be ready for anything.

Practice what you preach Seival

Hmm... Can you imagine sequel based on Refusal ending?

Shepard refused, and you are playing during the next Cycle that failed to understand the threat of the Reapers, just like all previous Cycles. You have to build the Crucible, and talk to the Catalyst again... Next Cycle might be quite exotic I believe. And there will be no Destroy option this time.

Are you ready for such ways of expanding MEU? I am.

I already know BW isn't doing a sequel on Refuse, but are you willing to do a Sequel without Reapers but atleast a mention of them?

From the one Casey quote I heard from one of the PAXs make it seems like an AU or reboot

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Seival wrote...

Hmm... Can you imagine sequel based on Refusal ending?

Shepard refused, and you are playing during the next Cycle that failed to understand the threat of the Reapers, just like all previous Cycles. You have to build the Crucible, and talk to the Catalyst again... Next Cycle might be quite exotic I believe. And there will be no Destroy option this time.

Are you ready for such ways of expanding MEU? I am.

Will we get the chance to refuse the catalyst again?

Being honest here, if I saw ghostboy in one more scene in the franchise, I think I might just shoot him for the sake of it.

Modifié par Lizardviking, 11 août 2013 - 10:00 .

[David7204]

Mr.House wrote...

LoU had a meaningful story and was not about a great conflict. Try again.

Is that right? Are you under the impression the extinction of humanity is not a great conflict?

Modifié par David7204, 11 août 2013 - 10:01 .

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

Mr.House wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

Do we really need a great conflict in order to have a meaningful story?

Yes.

LoU had a meaningful story and was not about a great conflict. Try again.

To play devil's advocate, one could argue that it is a greater conflict since the girl (sorry, have not played the game, just seen a few clips and such) is the key to a cure.

[Seival]

Lizardviking wrote...

Seival wrote...

Hmm... Can you imagine sequel based on Refusal ending?

Shepard refused, and you are playing during the next Cycle that failed to understand the threat of the Reapers, just like all previous Cycles. You have to build the Crucible, and talk to the Catalyst again... Next Cycle might be quite exotic I believe. And there will be no Destroy option this time.

Are you ready for such ways of expanding MEU? I am.

Will we get the chance to refuse the catalyst again.

Of course

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

LoU had a meaningful story and was not about a great conflict. Try again.

Is that right? Are you under the impression the extinction of humanity is not a great conflict?

The Godfather didn't have a great conflict.

Neither did Trainspotting.

Neither does Dexter.

Neither did 2001.

Neither did Citizen Kane.

[AresKeith]

David7204 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

LoU had a meaningful story and was not about a great conflict. Try again.

Is that right? Are you under the impression the extinction of humanity is not a great conflict?

My sides :lol:

David staph 

[Seival]

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

AresKeith wrote...

Seival wrote...

Destroy itself might not be the case in case of sequel. So, you should be ready for anything.

Practice what you preach Seival

Hmm... Can you imagine sequel based on Refusal ending?

Shepard refused, and you are playing during the next Cycle that failed to understand the threat of the Reapers, just like all previous Cycles. You have to build the Crucible, and talk to the Catalyst again... Next Cycle might be quite exotic I believe. And there will be no Destroy option this time.

Are you ready for such ways of expanding MEU? I am.

I already know BW isn't doing a sequel on Refuse, but are you willing to do a Sequel without Reapers but atleast a mention of them?

From the one Casey quote I heard from one of the PAXs make it seems like an AU or reboot

You can't even imagine what BioWare is doing right now. There were no full-scale official announces yet.

Do not dismiss even the most exotic possibilities
Reboot with Synthesis as the only option in the end? Why not?

Modifié par Seival, 11 août 2013 - 10:09 .

[David7204]

They all had conflicts. All of them. Mass Effect is an 'epic,' and hence requires conflict on a much greater scale.

[Mr.House]

David7204 wrote...

Mr.House wrote...

LoU had a meaningful story and was not about a great conflict. Try again.

Is that right? Are you under the impression the extinction of humanity is not a great conflict?

LoU is not about the extinction of humanity, play the dam game.

David7204 wrote...

They all had conflicts. All of them. Mass Effect is an 'epic,' and hence requires conflict on a much greater scale.

More like a epic fail.

Modifié par Mr.House, 11 août 2013 - 10:07 .

[Tyrannosaurus Rex]

David7204 wrote...

Lizardviking wrote...

Do we really need a great conflict in order to have a meaningful story?

Yes.

I suppose it really depends on one's definition of "great". When I made the post I was thinking of a force or enemy that threatened entire worlds or the whole galaxy, like the  Reapers. And I don't believe one needs that in order to make a compelling story set in the ME universe.

[chidingewe8036]

any of you guys ever listen to the collector base assault soundtrack from ME2 with the Suicide Mission Score and The Long Walk Score? Now that along with the Mass Effect Main Theme from the first game is what MASS EFFECT is all about. Bioware cannot, will not, and will never have tracks to a game or story that epic again. Goosebumps everytime, unbelievable. Only thing missing from ME2, for me, was my Ashley.

[AresKeith]

Seival wrote...

You can't even imagine what BioWare is doing right now. There were no full-scale officially announced yet.

Do not dismiss even the most exotic possibilities
Reboot with Synthesis as the only option in the end? Why not?

:mellow:

Now your just not trying anymore

David7204 wrote...

They all had conflicts. All of them. Mass Effect is an 'epic,' and hence requires conflict on a much greater scale.

Not even close

Modifié par AresKeith, 11 août 2013 - 10:10 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

They all had conflicts. All of them. Mass Effect is an 'epic,' and hence requires conflict on a much greater scale.

Yes they had conflict.

That was not your argument. You changed your argument. You said that all stories had to have 'great conflict'. You are backpedalling.

That said, Mass Effect does not require a large conflict on a large scale.

A smaller, more intimate story that has more choice and branching narrative within the story would be received very well.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 11 août 2013 - 10:12 .

[The Heretic of Time]

David7204 wrote...

They all had conflicts. All of them. Mass Effect is an 'epic,' and hence requires conflict on a much greater scale.

Seems you don't have a proper understanding of the word 'epic'. Figures.

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

You're assuming that all the characters in Mass Effect are the same. They're not. 

You're assuming that all of our Shepard's our the same. They're not.

I know there's not a single character in the game that kills or has killed innocent people for their personal benefit.

You mean besides Wrex, Zaeed, Samara, and potentially Legion? I'm sure there are more I'm not thinking of. This is of course excluding antagonists.

[AlanC9]

Does Samara really count as a case of personal benefit?

Modifié par AlanC9, 11 août 2013 - 10:16 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

You're assuming that all the characters in Mass Effect are the same. They're not. 

You're assuming that all of our Shepard's our the same. They're not.

I know there's not a single character in the game that kills or has killed innocent people for their personal benefit.

Shepard. TIM. Miranda. Zaeed. Samara. Wrex. Jack. Hackett. The Council. Harbinger. The Catalyst. The Reapers. 

[AresKeith]

AlanC9 wrote...

Does Samara really count as a case of personal benefit?

Well she basically threatened to kill the Detective and others if they got in her way on her recruit mission