Aller au contenu

Photo

Replayed ME3 over a year after first playthrough, pleasantly surprised


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
123 réponses à ce sujet

#51
TheProtheans

TheProtheans
  • Members
  • 1 622 messages

Mcfly616 wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

1) Bioware did not listen to the fans.

You can keep your bad opinions, I just wanted to correct you on that point.

They most definitely did. Maybe they didn't listen to you or me. But they absolutely listened to their fans. No need to correct anybody, seeing as you're the one in the wrong.


It's really just your opinion that they did and my opinion that they did not.
In the end it is clear they did and they did not, they created ending DLC but they did not do it the way fans wanted.
I guess you could say they listened to me by creating ending DLC but didn't take any real feedback into account.

And that's really the gist of it, the content of the ending DLC was not created with fan feedback.
And neither was the Citadel DLC or Omega, or anything really.


Extended Cut: showed where the hell our squadmates disappeared to on the Beam Run. Had the Catalyst actually explain itself. And it showed us the impact our final choice had on the galaxy.

Leviathan DLC: more lore about the Reapers. Squad banter.

Omega: return to Omega. Fight alongside Aria. Featuring a female Turian. New enemies.

Citadel DLC: more down-time with squadmates. More LI content.



People wanted these things. Maybe not you.....


It's not an opinion. It's a fact. Bioware implemented fan feedback in each of the DLC's.


One of the fans requests was to fix the plot holes and things that made no sense, showing what happened to the squad does not help this.
I would not mistake Bioware following their own agenda as them listening to fans.

#52
TheProtheans

TheProtheans
  • Members
  • 1 622 messages

JamesFaith wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

JamesFaith wrote...
And minimally people demanding option refuse Catalyst even if it would mean losing war with Reapers, got what they asked.


I don't think that was quite what people were asking for.
It would be like me asking for cake and finding that I am being served sponge cake with turd topping. 


No, this was exactly what some fans demanded.

There were three different demands on Refuse, all with quite much supporting threads.

Refuse with succesful conventional victory - conventional happy end.
Refuse with conventional victory with great losses and damage to galaxy.
Refuse "I rather sacrifice galaxy then sacrifice my humanity, then listen to that liar and so on..."

And third group got what they wanted.


I'm not quite sure you understood what I meant.
You still get the sponge which is the point you're making, but there is turd topping.

#53
Sir DeLoria

Sir DeLoria
  • Members
  • 5 246 messages

iakus wrote...

Then there's the "pick your atrocity" aspect.  Do you want to slaughter your own allies, enslave the galaxy, or genetically violate every living being in the galaxy.  

Don't like it?  Rocks, fall, everyone dies!  Now reload and pick a color!

Shepard's personlity is largely out of our hands, You are railroaded into doing something awful to the galaxy and in all probability die.  Bioware should be ashamed of themselves for calling this an rpg, and hopefully the next game won't come from the"DM Fiat" school of roleplaying.


I beg to differ, never did I ever "slaughter my allies". There is nothing wrong with the High EMS destroy ending. Sure, the execution is beyond terrible, but in the end everyone's happy^_^

#54
RZIBARA

RZIBARA
  • Members
  • 4 066 messages

Necanor wrote...

iakus wrote...

Then there's the "pick your atrocity" aspect.  Do you want to slaughter your own allies, enslave the galaxy, or genetically violate every living being in the galaxy.  

Don't like it?  Rocks, fall, everyone dies!  Now reload and pick a color!

Shepard's personlity is largely out of our hands, You are railroaded into doing something awful to the galaxy and in all probability die.  Bioware should be ashamed of themselves for calling this an rpg, and hopefully the next game won't come from the"DM Fiat" school of roleplaying.


I beg to differ, never did I ever "slaughter my allies". There is nothing wrong with the High EMS destroy ending. Sure, the execution is beyond terrible, but in the end everyone's happy^_^


See Necanor, this is where you are wrong indeed. Not everyone's happy. NOT EVERYONE hates the Geth.

In the end, i see it as a necessary sacrifice, as the other endings are terrible, but I can live with destroy. It doesnt mean i dont get pissed off that the Geth have to get killed, but I can live with it

#55
Sir DeLoria

Sir DeLoria
  • Members
  • 5 246 messages

RZIBARA wrote...

Necanor wrote...

I beg to differ, never did I ever "slaughter my allies". There is nothing wrong with the High EMS destroy ending. Sure, the execution is beyond terrible, but in the end everyone's happy^_^


See Necanor, this is where you are wrong indeed. Not everyone's happy. NOT EVERYONE hates the Geth.

In the end, i see it as a necessary sacrifice, as the other endings are terrible, but I can live with destroy. It doesnt mean i dont get pissed off that the Geth have to get killed, but I can live with it

I was just countering Iakus, by doing the same thing he did, stating my opinion as a fact. Sure, some people are unhappy about the demise of the Geth, but on the other hand a large portion of players has absolutely no quarrels with frying the lampheads. Heck, I never let them get past Rannoch anyway.

Everyone has a right to their opinion, but not all players have problems with the destroy ending.

#56
Br3admax

Br3admax
  • Members
  • 12 316 messages

Necanor wrote...

RZIBARA wrote...

Necanor wrote...

I beg to differ, never did I ever "slaughter my allies". There is nothing wrong with the High EMS destroy ending. Sure, the execution is beyond terrible, but in the end everyone's happy^_^


See Necanor, this is where you are wrong indeed. Not everyone's happy. NOT EVERYONE hates the Geth.

In the end, i see it as a necessary sacrifice, as the other endings are terrible, but I can live with destroy. It doesnt mean i dont get pissed off that the Geth have to get killed, but I can live with it

I was just countering Iakus, by doing the same thing he did, stating my opinion as a fact. Sure, some people are unhappy about the demise of the Geth, but on the other hand a large portion of players has absolutely no quarrels with frying the lampheads. Heck, I never let them get past Rannoch anyway.

Everyone has a right to their opinion, but not all players have problems with the destroy ending.

Relevant. 

#57
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 285 messages

Necanor wrote...
I was just countering Iakus, by doing the same thing he did, stating my opinion as a fact. Sure, some people are unhappy about the demise of the Geth, but on the other hand a large portion of players has absolutely no quarrels with frying the lampheads. Heck, I never let them get past Rannoch anyway.

Everyone has a right to their opinion, but not all players have problems with the destroy ending.


It's a fact that my opinion is based on my considering the synthetic holocaust an atrocity.

You're fine with slaughtering the geth and EDI.  Good for you. You got lucky that Bioware's "art" appealed to you.  I and many others were not so fortunate.

#58
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 624 messages

TheProtheans wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

It's not an opinion. It's a fact. Bioware implemented fan feedback in each of the DLC's.


One of the fans requests was to fix the plot holes and things that made no sense, showing what happened to the squad does not help this.
I would not mistake Bioware following their own agenda as them listening to fans.


So... unless Bio addressed every single fan request, they're not listening? I don't think "listening" is the right word for this.

It is also possible for Bio to "listen" to some requests and reject others.

Modifié par AlanC9, 16 septembre 2013 - 09:17 .


#59
Sir DeLoria

Sir DeLoria
  • Members
  • 5 246 messages

iakus wrote...

Necanor wrote...
I was just countering Iakus, by doing the same thing he did, stating my opinion as a fact. Sure, some people are unhappy about the demise of the Geth, but on the other hand a large portion of players has absolutely no quarrels with frying the lampheads. Heck, I never let them get past Rannoch anyway.

Everyone has a right to their opinion, but not all players have problems with the destroy ending.


It's a fact that my opinion is based on my considering the synthetic holocaust an atrocity.

You're fine with slaughtering the geth and EDI.  Good for you. You got lucky that Bioware's "art" appealed to you.  I and many others were not so fortunate.

EDI was a necessary sacrifice, the Geth deserve death. Since I dispose of the Geth as soon as possible, it would be silly too choose anything but destroy. EDI sacrifices herself for the good of the galaxy.

#60
Br3admax

Br3admax
  • Members
  • 12 316 messages

Necanor wrote...

iakus wrote...

Necanor wrote...
I was just countering Iakus, by doing the same thing he did, stating my opinion as a fact. Sure, some people are unhappy about the demise of the Geth, but on the other hand a large portion of players has absolutely no quarrels with frying the lampheads. Heck, I never let them get past Rannoch anyway.

Everyone has a right to their opinion, but not all players have problems with the destroy ending.


It's a fact that my opinion is based on my considering the synthetic holocaust an atrocity.

You're fine with slaughtering the geth and EDI.  Good for you. You got lucky that Bioware's "art" appealed to you.  I and many others were not so fortunate.

EDI was a necessary sacrifice, the Geth deserve death. Since I dispose of the Geth as soon as possible, it would be silly too choose anything but destroy. EDI sacrifices herself for the good of the galaxy.

Good. Good. This is the proper choice. 

#61
RZIBARA

RZIBARA
  • Members
  • 4 066 messages
Peace -> Destroy

#62
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 285 messages

Necanor wrote...
 EDI Shepard sacrifices herself shoots EDI in the back for the good of the galaxy. t


Fixed that for ya ;)

#63
RukiaKuchki

RukiaKuchki
  • Members
  • 524 messages

In Exile wrote...

For a series that's all power trip, disempowering the player right at the end of the game is just insane as a design decision. 


I couldn't disagree with this more. To me, the ending shows that no matter how physically strong you are, no matter how much armour you wear, no matter how many powers you have, no matter how many friends you have, no matter how many allies you have....at the end of the day, your only 'weapon' is your resolve, your strength of character and your judgement (on the future of mankind and all of the galactic races). The material things you have gained over the previous games will only get you to the end game, they don't grant you an automatic pass to the ending you feel that you deserve. As a reward for getting to the end game - where no one else has managed - the Catalyst essentially hands Shepard the metaphorical keys to the kingdom but with a couple of unpleasant caveats. He doesn't have the option to whip out his gun/biotics and beat down the Catalyst - he is in a position of weakness. It's perhaps upsetting/annoying to see because we have never seen Shepard in that position before.

Now, I think the image of the child as the Catalyst was horrible and cliche and all the other things repeated ad hominem on the BSN (I felt no emotional connection to this kid..if it was Mordin, or Kaiden perhaps that would have had more impact on me), but I like the idea of the protagnist being disempowered. All the way through ME3, no matter how bad things got, you just knew that Shepard would find a way. He defeated Saren. He destroyed the Collectors. He destroyed Cerberus. You were expecting him to defeat the Reapers because that's what he does. He wins. Always. But not this time. Some things are bigger than him and his moral code. Whichever choice he makes, a huge sacrifice must be made. Someone will lose. He has to chose something that goes against everything he stands for to ensure the survival of the galaxy - he has to sacrifice not only his physical self, but more than likely his own ideals. It feels like a kick in the gut, but that is so much more like reality. 

#64
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 285 messages

RukiaKuchki wrote...
 But not this time. Some things are bigger than him and his moral code. Whichever choice he makes, a huge sacrifice must be made. Someone will lose. He has to chose something that goes against everything he stands for to ensure the survival of the galaxy - he has to sacrifice not only his physical self, but more than likely his own ideals. It feels like a kick in the gut, but that is so much more like reality. 


This is called "railroading" that might be fine your your typical action-shooter, but it's a big no-no in rpgs.  Making the player lose no matter what choices are made...what's the point of giving choices to begin with?  

If this is "art" I'll take entertainment

#65
Chashan

Chashan
  • Members
  • 1 654 messages

iakus wrote...

Necanor wrote...
 EDI Shepard sacrifices herself shoots EDI in the back for the good of the galaxy. t


Fixed that for ya ;)


Thing is, it's more akin to the Catalyst openly threatening to take EDI, and Geth, with it out of sheer spite.

Which would work, if it weren't posing as an obnoxious kid. And if the decision chamber weren't just that: an isolation chamber without any input by anyone else whatsoever. Only an insane AI that for whatever contrived reason chooses to look like the only kid ever to be in ME, and whose every word is supposed to be taken seriously.

I played through DE:HR recently, a title I've seen some point to as a source of 'inspiration' for ME3's magic buttons. What the developers did there was to have a character players explicitly met as the game progressed and which proved itself to be trustworthy to boot lay down how to wrap things up. Some of the dialogue of that game's end grated me a little, but it worked. With the would-be hostage-taker of ME3, there is no such prior encounter, no build-up of the thing's character.

Throughout the trilogy, the Reapers' actions pretty steadily built them up to be directed by a monstrous intelligence indeed. Bummer that BW chose to make them a kid's toys instead. And not even the delightfully twisted sort of kid, naw.

Hence, I don't miss the thing's appearance in my playthroughs too much.

RukiaKuchki wrote...

[...]
 He has to chose something that goes against everything he stands for to ensure the survival of the galaxy - he has to sacrifice not only his physical self, but more than likely his own ideals. It feels like a kick in the gut, but that is so much more like reality.


I've had more...pleasant... 'kicks to the face' from games recently, such as The Walking Dead Ep. 5 and Spec Ops: The Line.

Which might have something to do with those leaving an impression that the developers actually knew where they were going with their flawed protagonists. Which Shepards by no means were exclusively built up as, nope.

#66
GreatBlueHeron

GreatBlueHeron
  • Members
  • 1 490 messages

RukiaKuchki wrote...

In Exile wrote...

For a series that's all power trip, disempowering the player right at the end of the game is just insane as a design decision. 


I couldn't disagree with this more. To me, the ending shows that no matter how physically strong you are, no matter how much armour you wear, no matter how many powers you have, no matter how many friends you have, no matter how many allies you have....at the end of the day, your only 'weapon' is your resolve, your strength of character and your judgement (on the future of mankind and all of the galactic races). The material things you have gained over the previous games will only get you to the end game, they don't grant you an automatic pass to the ending you feel that you deserve. As a reward for getting to the end game - where no one else has managed - the Catalyst essentially hands Shepard the metaphorical keys to the kingdom but with a couple of unpleasant caveats. He doesn't have the option to whip out his gun/biotics and beat down the Catalyst - he is in a position of weakness. It's perhaps upsetting/annoying to see because we have never seen Shepard in that position before.

Now, I think the image of the child as the Catalyst was horrible and cliche and all the other things repeated ad hominem on the BSN (I felt no emotional connection to this kid..if it was Mordin, or Kaiden perhaps that would have had more impact on me), but I like the idea of the protagnist being disempowered. All the way through ME3, no matter how bad things got, you just knew that Shepard would find a way. He defeated Saren. He destroyed the Collectors. He destroyed Cerberus. You were expecting him to defeat the Reapers because that's what he does. He wins. Always. But not this time. Some things are bigger than him and his moral code. Whichever choice he makes, a huge sacrifice must be made. Someone will lose. He has to chose something that goes against everything he stands for to ensure the survival of the galaxy - he has to sacrifice not only his physical self, but more than likely his own ideals. It feels like a kick in the gut, but that is so much more like reality. 


This. Post. Is. Awesome.  + 1
I hope bioware doesn't go all rainbows, puppies, flowers and kittens (although I like those things) with the next ending.  I can see them doing it for giggles...and that worries me.  I didn't get exactly  what I wanted as a final choice with me3's ending, but I appreciate bioware's effort.  The final boss isn't marauder sheilds, TIM or starboy---it's the player's mind. 

#67
Reorte

Reorte
  • Members
  • 6 592 messages
ME3 is, without the endings, a fun enough game for the most part, with some points that are the best parts of the whole ME trilogy even if it doesn't stack up overall. The DLC helps a great deal with this. The big war thing is inevitably going to suck some of the enjoyment out of it since the biggest appeal (at least to me) was wandering around an interesting universe with interesting characters, but I suppose that going was inevitable, alas. At least it's one point the story actually pointed towards.

Endings though, as has been said plenty of times, remain abysmal and ridiculous. With the EC, and if you turn your brain off, they at least get as far as the "it's done, my part's over, goodbye" feeling that would be fitting if you've played an anithero style Shepard who has finally found redemption (which is completely unfitting for most of my Shepards).

#68
Reorte

Reorte
  • Members
  • 6 592 messages

RukiaKuchki wrote...

In Exile wrote...

For a series that's all power trip, disempowering the player right at the end of the game is just insane as a design decision. 


I couldn't disagree with this more. To me, the ending shows that no matter how physically strong you are, no matter how much armour you wear, no matter how many powers you have, no matter how many friends you have, no matter how many allies you have....at the end of the day, your only 'weapon' is your resolve, your strength of character and your judgement (on the future of mankind and all of the galactic races). The material things you have gained over the previous games will only get you to the end game, they don't grant you an automatic pass to the ending you feel that you deserve. As a reward for getting to the end game - where no one else has managed - the Catalyst essentially hands Shepard the metaphorical keys to the kingdom but with a couple of unpleasant caveats. He doesn't have the option to whip out his gun/biotics and beat down the Catalyst - he is in a position of weakness. It's perhaps upsetting/annoying to see because we have never seen Shepard in that position before.

Now, I think the image of the child as the Catalyst was horrible and cliche and all the other things repeated ad hominem on the BSN (I felt no emotional connection to this kid..if it was Mordin, or Kaiden perhaps that would have had more impact on me), but I like the idea of the protagnist being disempowered. All the way through ME3, no matter how bad things got, you just knew that Shepard would find a way. He defeated Saren. He destroyed the Collectors. He destroyed Cerberus. You were expecting him to defeat the Reapers because that's what he does. He wins. Always. But not this time. Some things are bigger than him and his moral code. Whichever choice he makes, a huge sacrifice must be made. Someone will lose. He has to chose something that goes against everything he stands for to ensure the survival of the galaxy - he has to sacrifice not only his physical self, but more than likely his own ideals. It feels like a kick in the gut, but that is so much more like reality.

What, completely out of tone and character for the entire series, and renders most of what you do irrelevent? That is should all boil down to one person, even if it includes some (utterly arbitrary) losses? No thanks. That is a much bigger ego trip than anything else. It might work in another story. It doesn't in this one. You say "It feels like a kick in the gut, but that is so much more like reality" but it isn't anything like reality. Just because the general idea might be (no-one is supremely victorious all the time) the details are so completely and utterly divorced from it.

Modifié par Reorte, 16 septembre 2013 - 10:58 .


#69
Sir DeLoria

Sir DeLoria
  • Members
  • 5 246 messages

iakus wrote...

Necanor wrote...
 EDI Shepard sacrifices herself shoots EDI in the back for the good of the galaxy. t


Fixed that for ya ;)

Eh, no big deal.

Image IPB

#70
Iakus

Iakus
  • Members
  • 30 285 messages

Chashan wrote...


Thing is, it's more akin to the Catalyst openly threatening to take EDI, and Geth, with it out of sheer spite.

Which would work, if it weren't posing as an obnoxious kid. And if the decision chamber weren't just that: an isolation chamber without any input by anyone else whatsoever. Only an insane AI that for whatever contrived reason chooses to look like the only kid ever to be in ME, and whose every word is supposed to be taken seriously.


Which is why I'd be able to handle it much better if they were given an actual meaningful sendoff like Mordin did.  Instead of being shuffled off like yesterday's garbage and forgotten about.

I've had more...pleasant... 'kicks to the face' from games recently, such as The Walking Dead Ep. 5 and Spec Ops: The Line.

Which might have something to do with those leaving an impression that the developers actually knew where they were going with their flawed protagonists. Which Shepards by no means were exclusively built up as, nope.


Also, neither game pretended there was going to be more than one outcome to the story.  Not like Mass Effect did.

#71
Mcfly616

Mcfly616
  • Members
  • 8 988 messages

TheProtheans wrote...

One of the fans requests was to fix the plot holes and things that made no sense, showing what happened to the squad does not help this.
I would not mistake Bioware following their own agenda as them listening to fans.



"Plot holes"?



And idc what "one of the fans requests were". Just because they didn't take each and every single last fan request into account and implement it within the game, doesn't mean that they don't listen to any fan requests and implement them into the game. Bottom line: can't please everyone. That doesn't equate to: they dont listen to anyone.

Modifié par Mcfly616, 17 septembre 2013 - 12:44 .


#72
Guest_StreetMagic_*

Guest_StreetMagic_*
  • Guests

Mcfly616 wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

One of the fans requests was to fix the plot holes and things that made no sense, showing what happened to the squad does not help this.
I would not mistake Bioware following their own agenda as them listening to fans.



"Plot holes"?



And idc what "one of the fans requests were". Just because they didn't take each and every single last fan request into account and implement it within the game, doesn't mean that they don't listen to any fan requests and implement them into the game.


I'd rather they not listen to any fan requests (nothing major at least), and just go on instinct and intuition. This served them well in the past, and we praised them for it.

Modifié par StreetMagic, 17 septembre 2013 - 12:44 .


#73
Mcfly616

Mcfly616
  • Members
  • 8 988 messages

StreetMagic wrote...

Mcfly616 wrote...

TheProtheans wrote...

One of the fans requests was to fix the plot holes and things that made no sense, showing what happened to the squad does not help this.
I would not mistake Bioware following their own agenda as them listening to fans.



"Plot holes"?



And idc what "one of the fans requests were". Just because they didn't take each and every single last fan request into account and implement it within the game, doesn't mean that they don't listen to any fan requests and implement them into the game.


I'd rather they not listen to any fan requests (nothing major at least), and just go on instinct and intuition. This served them well in the past, and we praised them for it.

yeah....I'd be fine with it. I remember the days when devs just made their games, and if people liked it, they liked it. There wasn't online forums to make "requests".

More times than not, I can't take fan service too seriously. Half the time its laughable. (cough Avengers cough)

#74
Guest_csm4267_*

Guest_csm4267_*
  • Guests

Mcfly616 wrote...

And idc what "one of the fans requests were". Just because they didn't take each and every single last fan request into account and implement it within the game, doesn't mean that they don't listen to any fan requests and implement them into the game. Bottom line: can't please everyone. That doesn't equate to: they dont listen to anyone.


Yeah, do you know how much money this game would cost if Bioware tried to satisfy every last person who bought this game? Their budget would be completely overblown. Game budgets are high enough. Trying to make a game where you make everyone happy will ultimately please no one.

This journey is not going anywhere I want to be"  And if the next ME game can't let me at least headcanon that as my ending (or something similar) , I'm not really interested in what comes next.  I have no interest in a galactic society built upon any of the "offiicial" endings as a foundation.  That's not my story.  And that certainly wasn't my Shepard.


Mass Effect has sort of been a choose your own adventure book, but just like the book, you have to select the options that are pre-selected for you. One of the most important aspects of an RPG is the illusion of choice.

in addition, all but one ending ended in Shepard's definitive death.  One, one ending ends in a lame, ambiguous "or is s/he?" breath scene

Then there's the "pick your atrocity" aspect.  Do you want to slaughter your own allies, enslave the galaxy, or genetically violate every living being in the galaxy.  

Don't like it?  Rocks, fall, everyone dies!  Now reload and pick a color!

Shepard's personlity is largely out of our hands, You are railroaded into doing
something awful to the galaxy and in all probability die.  Bioware should be ashamed of themselves for calling this an rpg, and hopefully the next game won't come from the"DM Fiat" school of roleplaying.


Sounds like you wanted an ending where you make a choice, but not have any serious consequences to go with it. Like it or not, this game did not end with a boss fight, or a quick simple, easy to understand ending. Instead you are left to make a hard choice, which, as foreshadowed throughout the game, "your choices will become less appealing as the Reapers devour your galaxy". Then you get to the end, and you see that play out. Hard choices. The options presented to you may not be very inviting, but you can't go to the developers and ask them to make a different option, because you don't like the ones they gave you. Mass Effect, as in life, you can't always get what you want, and you have to make the best of the situation even those options are not good.

The ending has a great deal of ambiguity and stuff left unexplained, but as this article states, it's always best to have something closer to Lost, than to the Matrix Reloaded Architect scene which explains too much. That's what people want--to have most stuff explained for them. Honestly a very bad thing to do, because it takes away some of the mystery the game once had. They want every bit of the ending explained. From why you have a gun with unlimited ammo, to why you shoot Anderson, but the bullet wound ends up on you instead of him, but he dies anyways.

Long story short, perhaps try to play the game and use some simple logic and reason to figure it out instead of going to Bioware and asking for a patch when you have a question.  This is a game based around making decisions after all. If you can't decide and you need them to decide for you why the ending is the way it is, or explain how Shepard got to Earth from Citadel I don't think this game is for you. I mean people like the characters and the story, but that's it. If they were really involved with it, they'd try to unravel the ending mystery or use their imagination or logic to fill in the blanks.

Modifié par csm4267, 17 septembre 2013 - 01:47 .


#75
AlanC9

AlanC9
  • Members
  • 35 624 messages

iakus wrote...

RukiaKuchki wrote...
 But not this time. Some things are bigger than him and his moral code. Whichever choice he makes, a huge sacrifice must be made. Someone will lose. He has to chose something that goes against everything he stands for to ensure the survival of the galaxy - he has to sacrifice not only his physical self, but more than likely his own ideals. It feels like a kick in the gut, but that is so much more like reality. 


This is called "railroading" that might be fine your your typical action-shooter, but it's a big no-no in rpgs.  Making the player lose no matter what choices are made...what's the point of giving choices to begin with?  

If this is "art" I'll take entertainment


That's an awfully expansive definition of railroading. If the PC doesn't get to do what he wants the way he wants to, it's railroading?