9 réponses à ce sujet

[Allan Schumacher]

KiddDaBeauty wrote...

Didn't Gaider once say that if there was one thing he would change if he could go back, it was to change the everybody wins-scenario at Redcliffe? Don't quote me on that however, but if somebody has an idea if I'm referring to something real, then please share and prove I'm not dreaming =)

I was going to comment the same thing.  I was in that thread too.

[Allan Schumacher]

I never understood why it is so great to have to make a choice, although you know nothing about the problem and therefore are completely unable to make a proper decision. Choosing solely based on your gut feelings is not interesting or engaging at all, it is just annoying if your decion comes back later to bite you in the butt.

In the case of Connor, do you know nothing about the problem?

[Allan Schumacher]

I'd prefer the game give me a hard choice and then give me real outcomes, both positive and negative, to either of them. Not give the player a magic win button hidden somewhere in past gameplay

Could you disassociate this from consequences for me please. I have a feeling I am misunderstanding your point.

[Allan Schumacher]

shh you! Why does something bad has to happen? There should be CHOICES with DIFERENT RESULTS. So If I go the extra mile, when there was no need to. I darn well expect something rewarding. Not something slighly less worse than the other horrible results.

The interesting thing is the concept of "reward" and what it means.

For myself, an interesting narrative is often a reward, and the idea that the narrative is progressing in an interesting way as a result of my character's choices, for good or ill, is enjoyable to me.  Obviously, for others, it's more explicitly succeeding at what was attempted.

That said, I *do* still typically like being the hero. While I didn't save Connor (and am not a fan of Connor's implementation), I do like Rannoch scene in ME3, as well as a lot of the genophage stuff. Same with most of ME2's suicide mission (my only gripe being that it was too easy to achieve).

On some level, a balance of "choices with no clear good outcome" mixed with "choices that end up working out the way you expect" and some level of "choices that subvert your expectation" may be an interesting way of approaching this.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 22 août 2013 - 02:00 .

[Allan Schumacher]

Having two choices and then having only ONE of those choices have anything negative tied to them at all, while the other choice is rainbows and sunshine IS moronic, idiotic, stupid and the simplest form of narrative attempt possible.

There is quite the implication in your choice of words here, Jimmy, given you appeared to be using content from both DA and ME as examples....

[Allan Schumacher]

AresKeith wrote...

ManchesterUnitedFan1 wrote...

David7204, if you have never even played the DA games, how do you feel qualified to post on a thread about a specific choice within said games?

Boggles the mind.

Because he feels that games should be about heroism instead of RPing

I'm quoting you, but it's been a trend in the past several posts.  I will not tolerate posters jumping on him with dismissive, public statements (for him to see) in a passive aggressive way because people disagree with him on what he wants out of a video game.


That said, David, understand that there's a degree of understanding that may be missed if you're not actually familiar with the example.  Especially since I'm not a fan of the Connor choice, either.

[Allan Schumacher]

I'm not sure I can. A choice has lots of value when you make it before you find out the consequences, true. But when the consequences are seen, the value of said choice is either validated or not.

The Anvil is a hard decision to make. All throughout the game, you aren't sure if saving it was right or wrong. Then the epilogues happen and you can see that even if you destroy it, it still winds up causing some harm and still leaves the dwarves with no answer to the ever-encroaching darkspawn with the shortest Blight in history just getting over. And if you preserve it, it can do huge amounts of damage... but it also helps the dwarves recover lost Thaigs and give them a shot at both reclaiming their empire and beating back the Darkspawn threat.

Those consequences made both decisions viable for me.

Finding out that no matter what I do, a Reaperized-Rachni Queen exists to plague the galaxy invalidated the Rachni Queen choice. The fact that the game also then makes the cloned Reaper Queen more dangerous, in that the Rachni workers you get as an EMS eventually rebel and harm the crucible is just more salt on the wound of deciding to "play it safe" by "eliminating the Rachni threat."

So it's more, of the "choices and consequences" that comes up, your preference lies solely in the choices and really shouldn't dwell on the consequences at all?

Choices have value as choices alone... but when the game finally does reveal the consequence, it can't help but retroactively give or reduce value of that choice.

I understand this, and I think there's a place for both. For instance, one aspect I did like about ME3's original ending was that not only can each choice be reasoned as the correct one, we have to make the choice the same way that Shepard does: never knowing the consequences of the choice. This was powerful for me.

At the same time, having who I could choose to send into the tubes in ME2 was a great system as well. Thane died... which sucked. It solicited an emotional response out of me (which is one of my "reward" mechanics I get out of games, regardless of the emotion). It also reinforced "Make sure to not make that mistake again.

Yes, after the fact I learned that I could have everyone survive by making better choices, but that didn't diminish the effect of having Thane die and I happily kept playing that playthrough (and enjoyed the Kirrahe aspects of ME3 to boot).

[Allan Schumacher]

This always amazes me, because on my very first ME2 run, with
essentially no knowledge of Bioware, the only person I lost was squishy
Mordin.

I'm not sure how "knowledge of BioWare" would necessarily apply, however.

Modifié par Allan Schumacher, 22 août 2013 - 02:45 .

[Allan Schumacher]

This argument is now going in circles and I've seen where this song goes on the BSN (and elsewhere...)

Best summation: people like different things and are often satisfied by different things. That doesn't make either perspective right or wrong. Just personal.

Locking.