611 réponses à ce sujet

[The Night Mammoth]

Batman does become the villain in the end.

[Br3admax]

David7204 wrote...

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

Batman "died" by the end of the trilogy. What the hell are you talking about?

[Rusty Sandusky]

Br3ad wrote...

David7204 wrote...

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

Batman "died" by the end of the trilogy. What the hell are you talking about?

I'm pretty sure the quote was referring to Dent not Botmun

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

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

He's corruptable, just not to the defintion that you're ascribing to the word. He's a freak when it comes to control. Batman is one of those guys that supports a more... Orwellian view of society, where individual freedoms and rights are limited in the name of preserving justice and security and preventing crime. Also, as evidenced in the film, this includes an incredible intrusion into the privacy of citizens everywhere. It's very indicative of the whole Intelligence scandal today and how the U.S. Government is spying on its own citizens.

[David7204]

Massively, that is completely and flatly nonsense. Never once have I said that 'evil' choices should only have negative consequences. Nor that heroic options should never have negative consequences.

If you think morals are childish and subjective, I suggest you go out and commit a crime. And then when you're in court, explain to the judge exactly how you think the laws (which are of course based on morals) are childish and subjective.

[David7204]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Batman does become the villain in the end.

...No he doesn't? 

[Br3admax]

ThisOnesUsername wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

David7204 wrote...

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

Batman "died" by the end of the trilogy. What the hell are you talking about?

I'm pretty sure the quote was referring to Dent not Botmun

Really doesn't matter, I'm just responding to David's idiotic comment.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

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?

It is pathetic David. Why do you resort to it? Why do you resort to petty insults and sophism? Why do you resort to claiming everything as non-sense because you don't like it? Why do you proclaim that good things happen in the world because of you?

[Rusty Sandusky]

I don't even know where this thread is anymore, wasn't it originally about the OP saying that ME3 was dead to them?

Modifié par ThisOnesUsername, 14 septembre 2013 - 12:45 .

[Br3admax]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

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?

It is pathetic David. Why do you resort to it? Why do you resort to petty insults and sophism? Why do you resort to claiming everything as non-sense because you don't like it? Why do you proclaim that good things happen in the world because of you?

They don't? I thought that it was accepted fact around here. My mistake.

Modifié par Br3ad, 14 septembre 2013 - 01:02 .

[The Night Mammoth]

David7204 wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Batman does become the villain in the end.

...No he doesn't? 

Have you seen the whole film? Batman has Gordon frame Batman for the murders of Dent and all those other people. He literally lives long enough enough to see himself become the villain.

[David7204]

I'm not that into Batman, but I am pretty damn sure he does not support an 'Orwellian society' where 'freedoms and rights are limited.'

[Ravensword]

Ohai, David! How was your most recent ban?

[David7204]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Have you seen the whole film? Batman has Gordon frame Batman for the murders of Dent and all those other people. He literally lives long enough enough to see himself become the villain.

That's entirely irrelavent. He's still clearly a good guy. That's made overwhelmingly clear to the audience. Heroism (or any other trait) is not dependent on the view of the character by other people. There's a trope that covers that - Hero with Bad Publicity.

Modifié par David7204, 14 septembre 2013 - 12:50 .

[YourFleshIsMine]

I would like the next ME game to have more character creation options and not to be restricted to a specific persona. I will say that having the choice between a male and female Shepard and being able to modify their appearance, at least in face, did make it so I could enjoy the game.

My preference normally would be self made characters.

Having said that, I find ME a very compelling series with a lot better and engaging story telling than other games. BW do have a thing going for them there. In fact ME2 was probably the weakest of the 3 in story telling as it lacked a lot of the depth that ME1 and 3 do have. Not to say that I didn't like ME2 but it was "ME light" as far as the story is concerned.

I still think that a lot of people confuse good or bad writing with what they do or do not like. Sometimes great story telling does include things we don't want to happen and having to actually deal with them on an emotional level because the story is that real to us at least on that level. BW are good at evoking emotions as we can see by topics like this.

The biggest problem ME3 has as far as I can tell, is that they let too much of the explanation of how it all worked to the last bit of the story and then went through it so quickly that it confused people as to what exactly happened. There were lots of conclusions drawn that were absolutely not in line with what actually happened and the extended version was much needed to help but even then there is still a lot of confusion.

The story telling was engaging and the story pushes ahead but unless you bought some dlc's like leviathan the pacing of finding out what was going on in the end seems completely off. You really need to sit back and think about it and puzzle it all together still. Most people probably aren't into that.

I'd hate to be crude and say that BW were overestimating what their players could or would puzzle together but I think there is some truth in that. Perhaps in their wish to make ME3 talked about and it evoking much discussion, they may not have realised how many incorrect interpretations would be made.

When I heard all the commotion in the beginning it was all about that in the end you had no choice and the earth would be destroyed no matter what you did, that Shepard discovered he/she was working for the reapers in the end and that the Illusive man was actually the part of Shepard that was fighting the reapers while Shepard was being used by them.

Based on such comments I decided it wasn't worth trying ME3 till much later. I am still curious And now that I have played through it twice, I can see what these comments were based on but also how loose and incorrect these comments were. In essence I was able to save Earth, killed the Illusive man who was not a part of me and kill the reapers. I might even have survived the ordeal in the end.

So, I think that ME3 is a great game but perhaps some of the realisations and discoveries about what was really going on could've started coming about earlier and in a bit more obvious way.

And of course, regardless of whether or not Shepard died in your ending, they have said that Shepard isn't coming back. And that also is something that not everybody is at peace with.

It may just be a video game but our emotions are real. The fact that the ME stories were able to evoke such emotions is a sign of good story telling. The rest is just people complaining about things that aren't really the issue. It sucks that the Shepard story ends but such is life and yeah they made things a bit too complicated at the end than was needed perhaps.

Still, to say that the series died with ME2 seems more of an emotional response and perhaps it's better to admit that you didn't like how some things turned out and that it made you feel things you prefer not feeling like loss rather than just calling it bad story telling.

[Br3admax]

StreetMagic wrote...

Yeah, Massively, go out and commit some crimes.

I suggest the deep south. In the state of South Carolina, it's illegal to play pinball if you're under the age of 18. Are you under 18?

Please stop talking. I have to live here. 

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

Massively, that is completely and flatly nonsense. Never once have I said that 'evil' choices should only have negative consequences. Nor that heroic options should never have negative consequences.

You have. Repeatedly. You're always ranting about how a player should never be punished for choosing what hthinks is right in the game (and by player, I'm sure you mean yourself). You've argued in the past that people who pick renegade options fully deserve any negative consequences in their games. 

If you think morals are childish and subjective, I suggest you go out and commit a crime. And then when you're in court, explain to the judge exactly how you think the laws (which are of course based on morals) are childish and subjective.

You just strawmanned my argument. You like to do that. Why? Does it make you feel powerful?

I never said morals or ethics are childish. I said 'your' morals and ethics are childish in comparison to the game. Maybe even in real life too.

As for moral relativism, yes, I am indeed a moral relativist. Human law doesn't change that. Human nature doesn't change that. If it was objective, the opposite would be impossible. Laws themselves aren't subjective. Not in the least, at least not for those that don't know how to move the system. They're very well defined and written rules based on normative behavior of humans as a standard to live by. But this is neither here nor there. The point is that it's not objective. I don't believe in a universal standard of good or bad. They're just words that we put to actions and ideas that really are nothing more than figments of one's imagination. 

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 14 septembre 2013 - 12:55 .

[Ravensword]

David loves straw men. It is known.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Br3ad wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

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?

It is pathetic David. Why do you resort to it? Why do you resort to petty insults and sophism? Why do you resort to claiming everything as non-sense because you don't like it? Why do you proclaim that good things happen in the world because of you?

They don't? I thought that it was excepted fact around here. My mistake.

David7204 wrote...

Massively, when good things exist in this world, it's because people like me make them. I can assure you people care immensely about my standards. Because they're right. And they'd be right whether I believed in them or not.

When he addresses me by name, I get all tingly inside because I know that he's mad.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 14 septembre 2013 - 01:02 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Ravensword wrote...

David loves straw men. It is known.

IT IS KNOWN!

[YourFleshIsMine]

Laws have loopholes so they're not always so well defined or written. It happens that the letter of the law gets in the way of the concept of justice, which is what laws were intended to preserver. The idea that laws are objective is not one you can really maintain, since laws are based on the norms and morals of either a majority of people or powerful politicians that sell laws to suit their purposes or those of their backers. Laws are definitely subjective because of that. They should be objective but they are not because we are not able of being objective no matter how hard we try. And anything that's written down has it's limitations and allows for interpretation. Even if laws were objective, which I do not believe, the application of said laws certainly isn't objective.

You said it yourself, there is no universal standard of good or bad and that actually proves that laws are not objective. In my view it would need to be a universal truth to be truly objective. But when you make a law that says you are not allowed to do something there is a reason why at least certain or most people think it's wrong. That can never be objective, it always involves personal feelings and opinions whether individually or as a society.

[David7204]

You know, Massively, I have an honest question for you.

I've been in a few situations in real life where you have a bunch of people discussing some radical idea or principle. Some idea that generally condemns some aspect of society or humanity and proposes something different. And it happens in all kinds of places with all kinds of topics. And I see these people just full of excitement, full of vigor. There's this very fervent atmosphere of revolution. Of power!

And you know what I notice? I notice that the minute they step out of the classroom or whatever, it vanishes. Vanishes into thin air. Immediately these very same people go right back to their routines, their jobs, their lives. It's just like night and day. These principals and ideas so excitedly discussed just a minute ago are not only forgotton, but very often completely contradicted.

What do you think my response to that phenomanon should be? When I look at that, what should I be thinking?

Modifié par David7204, 14 septembre 2013 - 01:05 .

[Ravensword]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

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?

It is pathetic David. Why do you resort to it? Why do you resort to petty insults and sophism? Why do you resort to claiming everything as non-sense because you don't like it? Why do you proclaim that good things happen in the world because of you?

They don't? I thought that it was excepted fact around here. My mistake.

David7204 wrote...

Massively, when good things exist in this world, it's because people like me make them. I can assure you people care immensely about my standards. Because they're right. And they'd be right whether I believed in them or not.

Equal parts grandiosity, self-delusion, and USI.

Modifié par Ravensword, 14 septembre 2013 - 01:03 .

[YourFleshIsMine]

David7204 wrote...

You know, Massively, I have an honest question for you.

I've been in a few situations in real life where you have a bunch of people discussing some radical idea or principle. Some idea that generally condemns some aspect of society or humanity and proposes something different. And it happens in all kinds of places with all kinds of topics. And I see these people just full of excitement, full of vigor. There's this very fervent atmosphere of revolution. Of power!

And you know what I notice? I notice that the minute they step out of the classroom or whatever, it vanishes. Vanishes into thin air. Immediately these very same people go right back to their routines, their jobs, their lives. It's just like night and day.

What do you think my response to that phenomanon should be? When I look at that, what should I be thinking?

That people are sheep and suck at being a strong individual. At least that's what I think.