611 réponses à ce sujet

[David7204]

StreetMagic, that is just plain and simply stupid.

No matter how much you whine to the contrary, all protagonists are going to have defined traits and qualities, and that's just the end of it. The alternative would not only be impossible from a technical perspective, but ridiculous from a narrative perspective. 

If that's truely the reason people are upset with me, it simply means they're idiots. And that include you, of course, if you really believe such nonsense. 

Modifié par David7204, 14 septembre 2013 - 11:22 .

[David7204]

We could actually have a conversation if you didn't resort to this very pathetic, very tedious nonsense.

It is pathetic, StreetMagic. It is. You know that, don't you?

[KaiserShep]

David, stop playing dumb already. Don't bother saying things like "We could have a conversation if [insert demand here]" when you yourself punctuate your ideas with personal attacks, making it less likely that people would want to actually discuss with you further. You could actually have an actual conversation if you stopped being such a bitter ubergrouch. People will not take your input seriously when you harpoon everyone's ideas and their intelligence incessantly.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 14 septembre 2013 - 11:38 .

[David7204]

Here is the very simple reality. Stories are about characters doing things. That's just the end of it. And you've sunk into a delusion that that reality no longer applies. You've filled your head with so much nonsense of what an RPG supposedly is that you've forgotten what a story is.

Here are the facts.

Shepard is an Alliance soldier. Shepard fights the Reapers. Shepard is on at least somewhat good terms with a fair number of people. Shepard goes after Saren. You can have different dialogue options of how the player feels, but all those things still clearly happen.

[David7204]

KaiserShep wrote...

David, stop playing dumb already. Don't bother saying things like "We could have a conversation if [insert demand here]" when you yourself punctuate your ideas with personal attacks, making it less likely that people would want to actually discuss with you further. You could actually have an actual conversation if you stopped being such a bitter ubergrouch. People will not take your input seriously when you harpoon everyone's ideas and their intelligence incessantly.

I'm sorry that you see consistency as being 'ubergrouch.' I judge content on the BSN with the same view I judge content in the game with. And myself with.

[Astartes Marine]

While I really love the first and second ME games the third was not so bad to me as to force me to declare the series dead after two.  I mean I'll be first in line to say it was flawed, messy even sloppy at points but there are some truly enjoyable segments in it, Tuchanka immediately comes to mind.

KaiserShep wrote...
David, stop playing dumb already. Don't bother saying things like "We could have a conversation if [insert demand here]" when you yourself punctuate your ideas with personal attacks, making it less likely that people would want to actually discuss with you further. You could actually have an actual conversation if you stopped being such a bitter ubergrouch. People will not take your input seriously when you harpoon everyone's ideas and their intelligence incessantly.

Very well said, sadly it won't change a thing and David will continue on being David; a big ol' jerk who thinks he knows everything and will jump at the opportunity to tell you how stupid you and your idea are.

[David7204]

Simple, StreetMagic. You whined earlier that working with aliens and the Council is because the writers 'forced it to happen.' There's no 'realistic justification,' according to you. It happened because the writers are stupid and lazy. That's why. Isn't that right? (And if it isn't right, by all means, explain to me why it is that Shepard works with the Council or aliens even if the player doesn't like them.)

Well how is Shepard being in the Alliance any different? Plenty of people on the BSN have expressed hatred for it. And yet, Shepard is an Alliance soldier anyway, isn't she? It must be because those silly, stupid, lazy writers forced it down their throats. Obvious, if the writers weren't so lazy and incomptent, such situations would never, ever arise.

Isn't that right?

Modifié par David7204, 14 septembre 2013 - 12:10 .

[KaiserShep]

David7204 wrote...
I'm sorry that you see consistency as being 'ubergrouch.' I judge content on the BSN with the same view I judge content in the game with. And myself with.

I don't want to drag this topic on further, but I want to just remark that you're basically undermining your own points when you choose to convey them in a manner that others find insulting, even if they're points people may agree with. As for consistency, it seems to me that the threads consistently derail because of this very topic.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 14 septembre 2013 - 12:10 .

[David7204]

Really? Huh. See, you said earlier that people are upset with me because I say Shepard has defined qualities. A 'default state of service.' That's what you wrote. So obviously, you vehemently disagree.

So now you're telling me that's not true. That it's perfectly okay for Shepard to have default qualities, such as being in the Alliance. Such as being on good terms with certain people.

I'm confused, StreetMagic. Is Shepard having defined qualities a problem, or is it not?

[MassivelyEffective0730]

I'm sure David has more than a few reports already. Having just been unbanned, you'd think he'd have learned his lesson. Allan Schu has been messaged and given the link.

[David7204]

We're not talking about whether Shepard does. We're talking about whether Shepard should. We're talking about whether it's a problem or not. Whether Shepard working with the Alliance and Council and aliens and Anderson is bad writing or not. So is it?

Also, I'm not sure where you got the idea me thinking Shepard must be a priest. That's completely inture. I fully support the inclusion of 'evil' options in Mass Effect and other games. 

Modifié par David7204, 14 septembre 2013 - 12:26 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

Really? Huh. See, you said earlier that people are upset with me because I say Shepard has defined qualities. A 'default state of service.' That's what you wrote. So obviously, you vehemently disagree.

So now you're telling me that's not true. That it's perfectly okay for Shepard to have default qualities, such as being in the Alliance. Such as being on good terms with certain people.

I'm confused, StreetMagic. Is Shepard having defined qualities a problem, or is it not?

This is a black-or-white fallacy. You assume that either one must have a problem with all defined qualities, or he must not have a problem with any. It's very possible, and indeed true, that people can have no problem with some defined qualities (such as Shepard's very name) or personal history or service record, while having a problem with how they can define their Shepard personality wise and in-game. This takes away from the role-play experience, something that Mass Effect is supposedly meant to be. I like being able to define my Shepard's attitudes, opinions, beliefs, behaviour, and demeanor.

[Rusty Sandusky]

"You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain."
Think about this David.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

We're not talking about whether Shepard does. We're talking about whether Shepard should. We're talking about whether it's a problem or not. Whether Shepard working with the Alliance and Council and aliens and Anderson is bad writing or not. So is it?

You're intentionally misrepresenting the argument of other people. Reductio ad absurdum ruins your argument. You've changed the argument, literally within this very statement from a question of 'should Shepard have predefined traits' (to which there is a complex answer that can be affirmed in both the affirmative and negative for a single answer as I already demonstrated) to 'the argument against predefined traits is an argument attacking the writing as bad'. Really David, what are you trying to prove here anymore. You do know you have your own banner here right? Are you honestly trying to be taken seriously anymore?

[MassivelyEffective0730]

ThisOnesUsername wrote...

"You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain."
Think about this David.

David probably hates that.

[David7204]

That's an ironic quote, considering the actual theme of the film is ultimately in defiance of it. Batman is 'truly incorruptable.'

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...
Also, I'm not sure where you got the idea me thinking Shepard must be a priest. That's completely inture. I fully support the inclusion of 'evil' options in Mass Effect and other games. 

Yet you also support having only negative consequences for the 'evil' options whereas the 'heroic' options should never have negative consequences. 

That's pretty childish, especially when you define it in terms like 'heroic' and 'evil'. 

I'd personally prefer a game where I don't know what the best option is all of the time, and have arguments presented in logical, reasonable manners. Let the player decide what's best. Everyone has different idea's of what good and bad are.