203 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

It almost seems to me like it's being suggested that there be equal balance regardless of the decisions you made in the previous games.

[spirosz]

David7204 wrote...

Is 'bias' somehow a problem?

The narrative has every right to present one option as better.

For example, like a romance that leads to someone not dying.  "The better" romance option. 

[spirosz]

spirosz wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Is 'bias' somehow a problem?

The narrative has every right to present one option as better.

For example, like a romance that leads to someone not dying.  "The better" romance option. 

David7204 wrote...

option as better.

AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[Bionuts]

David7204 wrote...

What this seems to boil down is "If the story says something, it's bad writing."

I see no reason whatsoever to believe that. Quite the opposite.

No.

The complaint is many things.

They treated the situation like a comic book

Instead of having an in-depth discussion about the pros and cons of curing the genophage (a pro-genophage stance isn't even required), they used sympathetic characters to sway you and racist character to represent the genophage.

They spent a lot of dialogue on pro-cure (Eve, Wrex, Mordin, Padok), but there is no one talking in depth about the situation.

[The Night Mammoth]

David7204 wrote...

That is simply nonsense because... oh, this is the part of the post where the poster usually makes some attempt at a cogent and logical argument, but it seems to be absent.

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 05 octobre 2013 - 01:30 .

[David7204]

That's completely different. The player's choice of who to romance doesn't factor into the themes of the story. It's a preference. It's essentially a trivial choice - neither the player not Shepard are defined by who he or she romances - and the narrative needs to respect that by having trivial consequence.

[spirosz]

David7204 wrote...

That's completely different. The player's choice of who to romance doesn't factor into the themes of the story. It's a preference. It's essentially a trivial choice - neither the player not Shepard are defined by who he or she romances - and the narrative needs to respect that by having trivial consequence.

Themes of the story?  Relationships were a driving part of the story, one of the many themes.  

[David7204]

This idea that using sympathetic characters to influence the audience is somehow bad writing is laughable. It's not only perfectly good writing, but an absolute cornerstone of morally grey characters and situations in the first place.

Modifié par David7204, 05 octobre 2013 - 01:42 .

[KaiserShep]

I'm curious as to what this in-depth discussion would entail, because at this point, we have a pretty good idea of what the krogan are like, and the risk they represent. Of course, if you didn't actually play the first two games, some context may be lost, but you're not going to suddenly gain it back with what will essentially be a talking codex. As one who DID play the previous games, I wouldn't want to sit and talk with anyone for any considerable amount mulling over the other side of the genophage cure debate, because Shepard has basically been there, and done that.

I think it helps to remember that the balance between proponents and opponents to the genophage cure has a lot to do with the threat that even brought this subject about. If it wasn't for the reapers, there would be no discussion about it, because the krogan would only be in danger of their own fatalism and nothing else.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 05 octobre 2013 - 01:38 .

[David7204]

spirosz wrote...

David7204 wrote...

That's completely different. The player's choice of who to romance doesn't factor into the themes of the story. It's a preference. It's essentially a trivial choice - neither the player not Shepard are defined by who he or she romances - and the narrative needs to respect that by having trivial consequence.

Themes of the story?  Relationships were a driving part of the story, one of the many themes.  

Do you think you're accomplishing anything by posting your little gifs? Are you so eager to join the rest of the clowns on this forum?

Friendship was a theme of the series. 'What kind of person do you want a romantic relationship with' was never a theme of the series.

Modifié par David7204, 05 octobre 2013 - 01:33 .

[Bionuts]

David7204 wrote...

This idea that using sympathetic characters to influence the idea is somehow bad writing is laughable. It's not only perfectly good writing, but an absolute cornerstone of morally grey characters and situations in the first place.

Perhaps if a person is a litte child so naive and stupid to think one person can represent a morality or idea. Then yes.

I care about information. I'm not stupid to be swayed by a sympathetic character.

[Br3admax]

David7204 wrote...

spirosz wrote...

David7204 wrote...

That's completely different. The player's choice of who to romance doesn't factor into the themes of the story. It's a preference. It's essentially a trivial choice - neither the player not Shepard are defined by who he or she romances - and the narrative needs to respect that by having trivial consequence.

Themes of the story?  Relationships were a driving part of the story, one of the many themes.  

Do you think you're accomplishing anything by posting your little gifs? Are you so eager to join the rest of the clowns on this forum?

Friendship was a theme of the series. 'What kind of person do you want a romantic relationship with' was never a theme of the series.

None of the crew memeber had to be friends. I don't know where this came from, but you should send it back. Also, was the personal attack really necessary? Continue to talk that way, and you'll deserve all the laugh gifs and hatred that this forum can dish. Which is a lot. 

[DeinonSlayer]

David7204 wrote...

What this seems to boil down is "If the story says something, it's bad writing."

You couldn't be further off the mark.

What's being said here is, if you're going to have someone make this kind of decision, arm them with the facts. If you want the audience to sympathize with person A, don't establish early on that person A did something horrific, then never mention it again and expect the audience to forget about it.

As I said before twice now, the genophage arc wasn't as bad about this, but some things were lost in the discussion (or were only brought up after the cure decision was made). I'm looking at ME3 as a standalone narrative here, not in the context of the larger trilogy.

I think ME2 struck the best balance for the Genophage arc. That footage in LotSB, Urdnot Torsk blowtorching a guy not thirty feet from Wrex's throne, really turned me off to the idea of a cure. People who only had ME3 to go on wouldn't have been exposed to such things.

[David7204]

Then you should probably give up on fiction altogether. You can read law books instead. Because the very simple reality is, fiction very rarely uses tedious debates to get ideals across. Not only because they're boring, but because such debates would be very contrived.

Modifié par David7204, 05 octobre 2013 - 01:45 .

[Bionuts]

KaiserShep wrote...

I'm curious as to what this in-depth discussion would entail, because at this point, we have a pretty good idea of what the krogan are like, and the risk they represent. Of course, if you didn't actually play the first two games, some context may be lost, but you're not going to suddenly gain it back with what will essentially be a talking codex. As one who DID play the previous games, I wouldn't want to sit and talk with anyone for any considerable amount mulling over the other side of the genophage cure debate, because Shepard has basically been there, and done that.

Yet you have Eve, Mordin, Wiks and Wrex for the pro-cure.

Curing the genophage is not some light decision. It's something that SHOULD and WOULD be discussed by many people. And many people would share concerns.

[David7204]

DeinonSlayer wrote...

What's being said here is, if you're going to have someone make this kind of decision, arm them with the facts. If you want the audience to sympathize with person A, don't establish early on that person A did something horrific, then never mention it again and expect the audience to forget about it.

That is just completely silly. By that logic, you can't ever have a sympathtic character in fiction that has done bad things. Because if you do, you're 'expecting the audience to forget about them.' Is that right?

[The Night Mammoth]

David7204 wrote...

This idea that using sympathetic characters to influence the idea is somehow bad writing is laughable.

Yeah, that's not really why people are saying it's bad though, or at least, it's not the primary reason. They're saying it's bad because there's no, or not enough, balance, and instead of the logical, reasonable points being presented, the writer's are skewing what should a more balanced debate. It partially undermines even giving the player the choice in the first place and strips the intellectual challenge of its merit. 

It's not only perfectly good writing, but an absolute cornerstone of morally grey characters and situations in the first place.

It's not grey enough is the point, really. The genophage choice is presented with a bias towards curing it. There's very little to present it as a questionable action.

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 05 octobre 2013 - 01:43 .

[David7204]

There's absolutely no obligation for the story to be balanced. What 'logical, reasonable' points does the story not give the player? That the krogan are violent? That they reproduce quickly? That's made incredibly clear.

Modifié par David7204, 05 octobre 2013 - 01:42 .

[Bionuts]

David7204 wrote...

Then you think probably give up on fiction altogether. You can read law books instead. Because the very simple reality is, fiction very rarely uses tedious debates to get ideals across. Not only because they're boring, but because such debates would be very contrived.

For trivial decisions it doesn't matter.

But curing the genophage is not a trivial decision. The fate of an entire species is in your hands. It should be taken more seriously and there should be discussions about it.

[David7204]

What point is there against curing the genophage that isn't made abundantly clear or easily deduced? What is this 'debate' going to add? That lots of krogan require lots of resources? That they're physically strong? These are all incredibly obvious conclusions.

[justafan]

Both the Genophage and Rannoch require you to be a veteran of the series in order to really have a choice.

For a new player, the choice is easy, cure the genophage, kill the Quarians. Sure Wreav is a dic...tator, but not nearly as bad as the Dalatrass. And Eve and Padok/Mordin are sympathetic no matter how you play it. Krogan Rebelwhatnow?

Same with Rannoch. Gee all those admirals don't respect my authoritae as space Jesus, I'm gonna side with the cosplaying robot fanboys, I wonder why everybody hates them so much? It must be because they are synthetics, because they would never commit genocide or join the reapers willingly... right? Geth consensus is the most one-sided presentation of a controversial issue in the entire ME series. Shepard's blind acceptance of bias in this situation goes right up there with the Catalyst in the original endings.

Things such as the cost of the Krogan Rebellions and full explanation as to why the genophage is not a sterility plague are left to previous games. Similarly, the cost of the morning war, and the trials faced by the Quarians in the past 300 years are never mentioned. ME3 gives you the impression that the admiralty board IS the species, and the only civilian you meet is close to death. ME1 and 2 both made clear that the Quarian civilians are both numerous and very sympathetic.

The ME3 bias is all to clear. And I think the problem is that they were trying to overcompensate for the bias of returning players (ME2 Mordin was fairly convincing, and Quarians got most of the sympathy pre-ME3) that they went way overboard in ME3, creating the problem we have in the final product.

[spirosz]

David7204 wrote...

spirosz wrote...

David7204 wrote...

That's completely different. The player's choice of who to romance doesn't factor into the themes of the story. It's a preference. It's essentially a trivial choice - neither the player not Shepard are defined by who he or she romances - and the narrative needs to respect that by having trivial consequence.

Themes of the story?  Relationships were a driving part of the story, one of the many themes.  

Do you think you're accomplishing anything by posting your little gifs? Are you so eager to join the rest of the clowns on this forum?

Friendship was a theme of the series. 'What kind of person do you want a romantic relationship with' was never a theme of the series.

Relationships were a theme in the series, which consists of (shocking I know) - friendships, lovers, enemies, lack of heroism. 

[KaiserShep]

Bionuts wrote...

Yet you have Eve, Mordin, Wiks and Wrex for the pro-cure.

Curing the genophage is not some light decision. It's something that SHOULD and WOULD be discussed by many people. And many people would share concerns.

Again, this balance depends largely on the choices you made in the previous games. To what length should this issue be discussed without being wholly redundant or a massive codex entry on the krogan rebellions until it meets your satisfaction? This seems more like an issue if you're coming into ME3 without much knowledge about the universe in general, in which case tough luck.
.

Modifié par KaiserShep, 05 octobre 2013 - 01:50 .

[The Night Mammoth]

David7204 wrote...

There's absolutely no obligation for the story to be balanced.

If the choice is supposed to be even a little thought provoking or challenging I think it should be. 

What 'logical, reasonable' points does the story not give the player? That the krogan are violent? That they reproduce quickly? That's made incredibly clear.

Those are just facts about the krogan. Anyone can read them and understand them, but they have no impact, not like the fully fleshed out characters of Wrex, Eve and Mordin.

[David7204]

spirosz wrote...

Relationships were a theme in the series, which consists of (shocking I know) - friendships, lovers, enemies, lack of heroism. 

I guess I just didn't say this simply enough.

What kind of person do you want a romantic relationship with' was never a theme of the series.

Modifié par David7204, 05 octobre 2013 - 01:48 .