173 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

Fixers0 wrote...

You're circling around it, again, this is quite is quite clear, Vulnerability should have been an option, not mandatory.

If you're expecting me to defend some of the guided emotional tones in ME3, don't. They're there, and in greater quantity than previous games. Tactical prowess and cooperation, a problem this series has always had, is another issue altogether.

But you do have the choice to be "more vulnerable and human" through choices, which is what the message states.

[Xilizhra]

I wish you didn't have to go back to the Alliance, because I liked the feeling of greater freedom that ME2 had. I wish you could interact more with the Council. I wish Liara was more engaged in the story and was more like her portrayal in LotSB, when she was practically Shepard's equal. I even wish that the galaxy wasn't getting ravaged as hard as it was, because quite frankly I like it. But despite those problems, I overall enjoyed ME3's story.

[Fixers0]

dreamgazer wrote...
If you're expecting me to defend some of the guided emotional tones in ME3, don't. They're there, and in greater quantity than previous games. Tactical prowess and cooperation, a problem this series has always had, is another issue altogether.

I have to ask then why you were disputing the claim that the dev's statement is a blatent lie. which it was. 

[dreamgazer]

Fixers0 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...
If you're expecting me to defend some of the guided emotional tones in ME3, don't. They're there, and in greater quantity than previous games. Tactical prowess and cooperation, a problem this series has always had, is another issue altogether.

I have to ask then why you were disputing the claim that the dev's statement is a blatent lie. which it was. 

For the reason you removed from my quote: you do have the choice to be more vulnerable and human. It's not a blatant lie, because there is some freedom in dialogue choices to open up Shepard's attitude.

Where does it state that you'd have the choice to be completely invulnerable and inhuman?

[Fixers0]

dreamgazer wrote...
For the reason you removed from my quote: you do have the choice to be more vulnerable and human. It's not a blatant lie, because there is some freedom in dialogue choices to open up Shepard's attitude.

Where does it state that you'd have the choice to be completely invulnerable and inhuman?

The quote says being vulernable is an option, and only an option, that's a blatent lie.

Modifié par Fixers0, 17 août 2013 - 06:33 .

[Karlone123]

Fixers0 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...
For the reason you removed from my quote: you do have the choice to be more vulnerable and human. It's not a blatant lie, because there is some freedom in dialogue choices to open up Shepard's attitude.

Where does it state that you'd have the choice to be completely invulnerable and inhuman?

The quote says being vulernable is an option, and only an option, that's a blatent lie.

That is true, Shepard does show vulnebabilty that is not an option to choose. In some dialogue you can choose not to look vulnerable but in cases where we lose control of Shepard he will look vulnerable. And that was quite frequent. I would prefer the option not to look it in at least one play through. Shepard mourning the loss of the child is one.

Modifié par Karlone123, 17 août 2013 - 06:58 .

[JamesFaith]

Fixers0 wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...
For the reason you removed from my quote: you do have the choice to be more vulnerable and human. It's not a blatant lie, because there is some freedom in dialogue choices to open up Shepard's attitude.

Where does it state that you'd have the choice to be completely invulnerable and inhuman?

The quote says being vulernable is an option, and only an option, that's a blatent lie.

Quote says "being more vulnerable". In quote constructed like this is optional scale of vulnerability, not vulnerability itself, especially when there is no comparison tied to word "more".

So no blatant lie, just quote which can be easily misintepreted.

[Philosophaster]

Han Shot First wrote...

I thought Mass Effect 3 was overall the best game of the trilogy until the last 10 minutes so. I hated the original endings.

The Extended Cut kind of redeemed the series for me. The endings aren't perfect, but enough holes were patched for me to look forward to a sequel.

Do you expect a sequel? Or should I ask which sequel? Casey Hudson certainly didn't seem to expect to make one as the endings were designed so that they wouldn't have to be tied together for another story. The following quote is his response to a question concerning complexity of the ending of ME3 relative to ME2.

"Yeah, and I’d say much more so, because we have the ability to build the endings out in a way that we don’t have to worry about eventually tying them back together somewhere. This story arc is coming to an end with this game. That means the endings can be a lot more different."

http://www.gameinfor...PostPageIndex=2

I am aware of the date being pre-ending controversy and EC. His opinion may have changed but that doesn't change the fact that the endings were created in such a way as to not be conducive to a sequel.

I know many people on these forums seem to be in favor of a sequel, but I do wonder what exactly they think they would get in a potential sequel. If given the option of prequel or sequel, many people are picking the latter because they want to see the effects of their actions.Many people vote sequel assuming their ending choice would be canonized for that game. How many people would suddenly change their vote if the options were prequel or Synthesis canon? Or Paragon Control canon? If people are worried that their actions would be meaningless in a prequel, wouldn't canonizing an ending choice that didn't match your own effectively invalidate the trilogy the same way?

I think if you want a clearer image of what fans want, you need to specify just what form that sequel will take. You made a poll that offered multiple options not that long ago (May 2013) and 68% voted in favor of sequel as opposed to reboot, AU, sidequel, prequel, and spin-off. A poll by another user three days after yours was originally posted asked which ending would provide the best foundation for a sequel. The results had Destroy with 58% followed by IT/Nightmare with 26%. Control and Synthesis managed 8% apiece.

http://social.biowar...91/polls/45678/

When you vote for a sequel, are you envisioning IT? Well, when you vote for a sequel option without distinctions being made, you are effectively in the same camp. "Sequel" seems to mean something different to each person. I would also question the validity of the polls on the BSN due to the sample size.

Modifié par inconsiderate rick, 17 août 2013 - 07:27 .

[Fixers0]

JamesFaith wrote...

Quote says "being more vulnerable". In quote constructed like this is optional scale of vulnerability, not vulnerability itself, especially when there is no comparison tied to word "more".

It just so happens that "being more vulnerable" wasn't an option, it's mandatory.

[Reorte]

I liked most of the game, just not as much as the first two (although arguable Tuchanka is the highlight of the entire trilogy).

[JamesFaith]

Fixers0 wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

Quote says "being more vulnerable". In quote constructed like this is optional scale of vulnerability, not vulnerability itself, especially when there is no comparison tied to word "more".

It just so happens that "being more vulnerable" wasn't an option, it's mandatory.

You are vulnerable, but you can chose with some options to be even "more" vulnerable.

Optionality still here, so no lie.

[Fixers0]

JamesFaith wrote...

You are vulnerable, but you can chose with some options to be even "more" vulnerable.

Optionality still here, so no lie.

Actually, optionally is not present, Shepard presents himself as most vulnerable when s/he demonstrates his/her lack of basic military tactics. so, yes it's a lie.

[Karlone123]

Fixers0 wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

You are vulnerable, but you can chose with some options to be even "more" vulnerable.

Optionality still here, so no lie.

Actually, optionally is not present, Shepard presents himself as most vulnerable when s/he demonstrates his/her lack of basic military tactics. so, yes it's a lie.

The option is show vulnerability or more vulnerability.

[Fixers0]

Karlone123 wrote...
The option is show vulnerability or more vulnerability.

Worse, Shepard by default, is more vulnerable in Mass Effect 3 then he was before.

[Xilizhra]

Fixers0 wrote...

Karlone123 wrote...
The option is show vulnerability or more vulnerability.

Worse, Shepard by default, is more vulnerable in Mass Effect 3 then he was before.

Doesn't that make sense, given the crumbling galaxy?

[Fixers0]

Xilizhra wrote...
Doesn't that make sense, given the crumbling galaxy?

I don't see the connection, I'm sorry.

[JamesFaith]

Fixers0 wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...

You are vulnerable, but you can chose with some options to be even "more" vulnerable.

Optionality still here, so no lie.

Actually, optionally is not present, Shepard presents himself as most vulnerable when s/he demonstrates his/her lack of basic military tactics. so, yes it's a lie.

One of my first lessons about quotes intepretation during my studies of law.

Purely subjective intepretations can't create objective lie by itself because this objectivity isn't tied to intepreters opinions but to intentions of speaker.

This is you opinion and it is your right to have it but it doesn't automatically make this quote lie.

[Seboist]

I liked the majority of ME3 but that's because in my case that consisted of the multiplayer.

Modifié par Seboist, 17 août 2013 - 07:23 .

[Fixers0]

JamesFaith wrote...
This is you opinion and it is your right to have it but it doesn't automatically make this quote lie.

 
It's not actually my opinon, Shepard being more vulernable then s/he were before, by default is a fact. thus the quote is a lie.

[JamesFaith]

Fixers0 wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...
This is you opinion and it is your right to have it but it doesn't automatically make this quote lie.

 
It's not actually my opinon, Shepard being more vulernable then s/he were before, by default is a fact. thus the quote is a lie.

But there were no comparison "more vulnerable then before". Speaker avoided it so you are adding new information to quote which aren't here and base your intepretation on it. 

If you want claim something objective lie you have to work only with this quote, not adding or skipping words.

[Fixers0]

JamesFaith wrote...
If you want claim something objective lie you have to work only with this quote, not adding or skipping words.

But I don't, it's a logical deduction, even If weren't to add anything, the quote is still a lie, as being more vulerable isn't an option. 

[ruggly]

IMO, I think it started to go downhill after Tuchanka during my second run, and kind of flatlined at Thessia. There's some good moments in between, but now it's kind of like a meh feeling.

[dreamgazer]

I'd encourage everyone to think about the multiple meanings of the word "vulnerable" before continuing this inane play on semantics.

[Han Shot First]

inconsiderate rick wrote...

Han Shot First wrote...

I thought Mass Effect 3 was overall the best game of the trilogy until the last 10 minutes so. I hated the original endings.

The Extended Cut kind of redeemed the series for me. The endings aren't perfect, but enough holes were patched for me to look forward to a sequel.

Do you expect a sequel? Or should I ask which sequel? Casey Hudson certainly didn't seem to expect to make one as the endings were designed so that they wouldn't have to be tied together for another story. The following quote is his response to a question concerning complexity of the ending of ME3 relative to ME2.

I wouldn't say I'm expecting a sequel. Hoping for one would probably be more accurate, as I have zero interest in an alternate universe and not much more in a prequel.

inconsiderate rick wrote...


I am aware of the date being pre-ending controversy and EC. His opinion may have changed but that doesn't change the fact that the endings were created in such a way as to not be conducive to a sequel.

I know many people on these forums seem to be in favor of a sequel, but I do wonder what exactly they think they would get in a potential sequel. If given the option of prequel or sequel, many people are picking the latter because they want to see the effects of their actions.Many people vote sequel assuming their ending choice would be canonized for that game. How many people would suddenly change their vote if the options were prequel or Synthesis canon? Or Paragon Control canon? If people are worried that their actions would be meaningless in a prequel, wouldn't canonizing an ending choice that didn't match your own effectively invalidate the trilogy the same way?

I think if you want a clearer image of what fans want, you need to specify just what form that sequel will take. You made a poll that offered multiple options not that long ago (May 2013) and 68% voted in favor of sequel as opposed to reboot, AU, sidequel, prequel, and spin-off. A poll by another user three days after yours was originally posted asked which ending would provide the best foundation for a sequel. The results had Destroy with 58% followed by IT/Nightmare with 26%. Control and Synthesis managed 8% apiece.

http://social.biowar...91/polls/45678/

When you vote for a sequel, are you envisioning IT? Well, when you vote for a sequel option without distinctions being made, you are effectively in the same camp. "Sequel" seems to mean something different to each person. I would also question the validity of the polls on the BSN due to the sample size.

With the next game I would like to see Bioware make a sequel, preferably in a way where any of the three main choices (Control, Synthesis, Destroy) are viable, but realize that may well be impossible. I do agree that the endings to Mass Effect 3 were likely crafted with the expectation that it would be the last game in the series, and that they wouldn't have to worry about carrying forward the consequences of those choices into another game.

If the writers can't figure out a way to work all three of those choices into a single game and in a manner that would satisfy most, I'd rather they just canonized a single ending and rolled with it. I'd also be lying if I said I didn't prefer that canonized ending to be Destroy, as it was my own choice, and the one that provides the most room for new antagonists, political scheming, and both intrafactional and interfactional conflict. (No Reaper guard dogs / no Synthesized utopia)

Obviously canonizing a single ending isn't going to please everyone, perhaps myself included, if say for example Synthesis is selected as the sole canon. But canonizing a single ending may be the best option available after ME3, where the endings leave Bioware in a situation that is not ideal for crafting more games set in the ME universe.

The alternatives to a sequel are either going alternate universe or rolling with a prequel. I find neither option particularly appealing. The problem with an alternate universe is that no choice made in ME3 matters, as the next game simply pretends the Shepard trilogy never existed at all. In that case, why not start a new Sci FI IP? A prequel isn't much better, as it then constrains the player in playing through events that already have known canon outcome and in a smaller galaxy with less factions.

[AlanC9]

inconsiderate rick wrote...

I think if you want a clearer image of what fans want, you need to specify just what form that sequel will take. You made a poll that offered multiple options not that long ago (May 2013) and 68% voted in favor of sequel as opposed to reboot, AU, sidequel, prequel, and spin-off. A poll by another user three days after yours was originally posted asked which ending would provide the best foundation for a sequel. The results had Destroy with 58% followed by IT/Nightmare with 26%. Control and Synthesis managed 8% apiece.

http://social.biowar...91/polls/45678/

When you vote for a sequel, are you envisioning IT? Well, when you vote for a sequel option without distinctions being made, you are effectively in the same camp. "Sequel" seems to mean something different to each person. I would also question the validity of the polls on the BSN due to the sample size.

Assuming the polls are accurate, looks like there's a pretty good plurality for canonized Destroy. Which I've been advocating since before the EC, even though my favorite ending is Paragon Control.