1331 réponses à ce sujet

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Xilizhra wrote...

I believe that the player getting the happy ending does not mean that everybody in the setting should.

I personally think that, ideally, there should be a chance of this too.

That kind of defeats the purpose of other endings then. I'm willing to say that a measure of personal sacrifice combined with heavy damage and loss of population for the galaxy would work for this, but I don't really believe in a 'everyone who is good gets their cake' ending. Much of this thread has been about the portrayal of choice, including difficult choices that are based more on player judgement rather than it being happy or good for the sake of it being happy and good. It undercuts the idea of the player deciding what the perfect ending is. And you and I have very different definitions of what the perfect ending for their story would be.

[Xilizhra]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I believe that the player getting the happy ending does not mean that everybody in the setting should.

I personally think that, ideally, there should be a chance of this too.

That kind of defeats the purpose of other endings then. I'm willing to say that a measure of personal sacrifice combined with heavy damage and loss of population for the galaxy would work for this, but I don't really believe in a 'everyone who is good gets their cake' ending. Much of this thread has been about the portrayal of choice, including difficult choices that are based more on player judgement rather than it being happy or good for the sake of it being happy and good. It undercuts the idea of the player deciding what the perfect ending is. And you and I have very different definitions of what the perfect ending for their story would be.

How would my getting to survive, say, Control or Synthesis undermine your version of Destroy, since you don't play it?

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Xilizhra wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

Xilizhra wrote...

I believe that the player getting the happy ending does not mean that everybody in the setting should.

I personally think that, ideally, there should be a chance of this too.

That kind of defeats the purpose of other endings then. I'm willing to say that a measure of personal sacrifice combined with heavy damage and loss of population for the galaxy would work for this, but I don't really believe in a 'everyone who is good gets their cake' ending. Much of this thread has been about the portrayal of choice, including difficult choices that are based more on player judgement rather than it being happy or good for the sake of it being happy and good. It undercuts the idea of the player deciding what the perfect ending is. And you and I have very different definitions of what the perfect ending for their story would be.

How would my getting to survive, say, Control or Synthesis undermine your version of Destroy, since you don't play it?

I didn't say anything about the ending choice. Leave it out.

[Estelindis]

Allan Schumacher wrote...

Dragon Age has a lot more choices happening within conversations (although we're trying to be more liberal with that in DAI. You can say one thing, but are free to still make another choice if you decide).

This is great news.  I liked the option to do this in cases like choosing the Orzammar monarch (you could support Bhelen or Harrrowmont regardless of who previously had your support) and, if I recall correctly, the Landsmeet (you could tell Anora you'd support her but didn't have to follow through on it, I think).  It gives lots of opportunities for manipulating people, if you're so inclined.

Of course, if you do it all the time, maybe people will start to think you're less trustworthy...?  Possibly not, though.  News in Thedas may not travel quickly enough for everyone to figure out they're all being played.
Anyway, thanks for the nugget of info.  

[dreamgazer]

Star fury wrote...

Fast Jimmy wrote...

Does this thread have any semblance of a topic any longer? Let alone one related to DA:I?

No, it doesn't. All thanks to one poster - David7204. Instead of stopping him from deraling the thread, mods will just close it and then blame whole bsn for bickering.

To be completely fair, the discussion that's taken place about RPGs, character investment, and "earning" happy endings isn't really that much of a derailment from the original topic.

Of course, the whole thing's moot since the poster doesn't actually understand the franchise he's talking about. 

Modifié par dreamgazer, 31 octobre 2013 - 02:13 .

[Dominus]

I prefer the sacrifice for the greater good, though a plethora of other potential endings are always a plus.
Heavy Rain had some darker "empty" endings that I thought were worth experiencing.

I'm curious, how does everyone feel about Fallout's system of limiting "optimal" solutions through your character's statistics? Some solutions can only be handled by a scientist, others can only be handled by someone who's a slaver, etc.

I'd put that on a love/hate basis, though I like the concept itself - A personal grudge against Fallout 2 seemingly requiring an unholy amount of scienctific skill to properly beat it(Checked FAQs and was unable to find the answer). I'm not sure about a class-specific ending per se, but using specific traits of a class to achieve that ending is something I'd like to see.

Am I the only one who just wants to and does play video games to hear a compelling story, to see a compelling world, to experience both and remember it as quality entertainment? Not to force my morals onto every single character, especially my own? Not to save the world from what I think it needs saving from? To make a statement about mankind? To just play a video game for an hour? Why should making "heroic" choices matter?

You don't have to. The choices are laid out, but whether you're roleplaying or just killing time is purely out of free will. Heroic choices don't always matter, but it's been made clear that moral dilemmas and tough choices(and their consequences) are going to be a big part of DA:I. I believe Mr. Laidlaw commented on that in a video interview around 4:50.

Modifié par DominusVita, 31 octobre 2013 - 02:25 .

[dreamgazer]

Br3ad wrote...

I don't play games to be heroic.
I don't play games to be Jeebus.
I don't play games so I can have control that I lack in real life.
I don't play games to live out my fantasies.
I don't play games to escape my suicidal thoughts.
I don't play games because it gives me a way to get out my frustrations.
I don't play video games to forget real life.

Am I the only one who just wants to and does play video games to hear a compelling story, to see a compelling world, to experience both and remember it as quality entertainment? Not to force my morals onto every single character, especially my own? Not to save the world from what I think it needs saving from? To make a statement about mankind? To just play a video game for an hour? Why should making "heroic" choices matter?

Nope, you're not alone.  While I admit that one game (Skyrim) did serve as a compelling coping mechanism when I dealt with the death of an immediate family member, I don't specifically seek out games for those purposes.  

[Br3admax]

dreamgazer wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

I don't play games to be heroic.
I don't play games to be Jeebus.
I don't play games so I can have control that I lack in real life.
I don't play games to live out my fantasies.
I don't play games to escape my suicidal thoughts.
I don't play games because it gives me a way to get out my frustrations.
I don't play video games to forget real life.

Am I the only one who just wants to and does play video games to hear a compelling story, to see a compelling world, to experience both and remember it as quality entertainment? Not to force my morals onto every single character, especially my own? Not to save the world from what I think it needs saving from? To make a statement about mankind? To just play a video game for an hour? Why should making "heroic" choices matter?

Nope, you're not alone.  While I admit that one game (Skyrim) did serve as a compelling coping mechanism when I dealt with the death of an immediate family member, I don't specifically seek out games for those purposes.  

No, that's fine. Skyrim is a game litterally about yelling at people. 

[Jorji Costava]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means. In fact, I know it doesn't.

Deductions are (in logical arguments) considered little more than conclusions drawn from hypothesis, supposition, and assumption based off of a general premise that is often prejudged by the person postulating the premise and deduction. You're assuming that your general premise is right, and that your conclusion, based on your deduction from your premise, is also correct. 

You don't have a sound argument since your premise, which is overwhelmingly seen as an imposition of your own beliefs, values, preferences, etc. is true as a whole for gamers (it's not). Your conclusion could possibly be valid, but your general premise, and thus your deduction (and thus, your argument) isn't sound.

Deductive reasoning in non-objective settings and terms (that is, non-mathematical or non-propositional and predicate logic) is not something that is taken seriously in logical debate. It's considered a skill that is developed without education or training. As such, it's not generally taught at higher levels of acadamia outside of logical calculus and mathematics. In high school for example, students are expected to use reasoning and logic at different and higher skill levels than deductive reasoning.

So because you make a deduction, it is not automatically correct, sound, or valid. A deduction is in logical argumentation, as I already stated, a form of prejudiced hypothesis, supposition, and, most importantly, assumption. I'm not saying it can't be used, but it can only be used correctly. You are not using it correctly.

A deductive argument is simply one in which, given the truth of the premises, the conclusion can't be denied without contradiction. There's no general requirement that the premises be general and the conclusion particular. Nor is deductive reasoning a 'lower' form of reasoning than any other. If I can editorialize a bit, I'd say that the fact that deductive reasoning isn't taught outside the college level isn't a good thing: People fail the Wason Selection Task over 90% of the time.

Having said all of that, I haven't seen any indication that David was actually employing a deductive argument.

Returning to the topic, I'm in general agreement that there probably should not be a clearly "best" ending (the Inquisitor and all his or her buddies live, waifu reunion, all is well in Thedas, etc.). This is because of the kind of choices Bioware tends to give us, which pit value systems against each other: Are you a hard-headed utilitarian willing to do Whatever It Takes To Get The Job Done, or do you have a more Paragon-minded, deontological approach? A "best" ending can't help but be a tacit judgment that the choices you made to get to that ending are the 'right' ones to make, and I'm not so sure the game should be in the business of making those judgments.

[The Heretic of Time]

Br3ad wrote...

I don't play games to be heroic.
I don't play games to be Jeebus.
I don't play games so I can have control that I lack in real life.
I don't play games to live out my fantasies.
I don't play games to escape my suicidal thoughts.
I don't play games because it gives me a way to get out my frustrations.
I don't play video games to forget real life.

Am I the only one who just wants to and does play video games to hear a compelling story, to see a compelling world, to experience both and remember it as quality entertainment? Not to force my morals onto every single character, especially my own? Not to save the world from what I think it needs saving from? To make a statement about mankind? To just play a video game for an hour? Why should making "heroic" choices matter?

You are not the only one. You can count me in. I do like to add though that I like the be challenged by games, both in terms of gameplay and in terms of storytelling and choices&consequences, especially in RPGs. I like to be intellectually challenged.

If a game is able to confront me on my morality and (world) views, and really makes me pauze for a second to think thing through before I make an in-game decision, I know I have a good game in my hands. So far, only very few games have ever managed to achieve this. Dragon Age: Origins came close to this point, but not quite. The Witcher however is a good example of a game series that managed to make me pauze and think things through before I was able to make a decision on my first playthrough.

I believe that a confronting or challenging decision-moment is a meaningful decision-moment. A clear-cut and obvious "choose this option for z0mg ultimate HEROISM with the best outcome!!!!!!111" decision-moment is completely meaningless, and therefor boring and stupid.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 31 octobre 2013 - 02:34 .

[crimzontearz]

Nope, forced PC death = no purchase, sorry

[ImperatorMortis]

Br3ad wrote...

I don't play games to be heroic.
I don't play games to be Jeebus.
I don't play games so I can have control that I lack in real life.
I don't play games to live out my fantasies.
I don't play games to escape my suicidal thoughts.
I don't play games because it gives me a way to get out my frustrations.
I don't play video games to forget real life.

Am I the only one who just wants to and does play video games to hear a compelling story, to see a compelling world, to experience both and remember it as quality entertainment? Not to force my morals onto every single character, especially my own? Not to save the world from what I think it needs saving from? To make a statement about mankind? To just play a video game for an hour? Why should making "heroic" choices matter?

Just because you prefer this doesn't mean every does. Don't get me wrong you should get whatever ending you want or a equivalent, but some of us enjoy playing through a game, and having certain decisions we've made let us have our "perfect" ending.

This is a RPG that advertises choice, its not a novel. 

[Br3admax]

ImperatorMortis wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

I don't play games to be heroic.
I don't play games to be Jeebus.
I don't play games so I can have control that I lack in real life.
I don't play games to live out my fantasies.
I don't play games to escape my suicidal thoughts.
I don't play games because it gives me a way to get out my frustrations.
I don't play video games to forget real life.

Am I the only one who just wants to and does play video games to hear a compelling story, to see a compelling world, to experience both and remember it as quality entertainment? Not to force my morals onto every single character, especially my own? Not to save the world from what I think it needs saving from? To make a statement about mankind? To just play a video game for an hour? Why should making "heroic" choices matter?

Just because you prefer this doesn't mean every does. Don't get me wrong you should get whatever ending you want or a equivalent, but some of us enjoy playing through a game, and having certain decisions we've made let us have our "perfect" ending.

This is a RPG that advertises choice, its not a novel. 

Choice doesn't =believe what I believe, anymore than fruit=apple. Having a choice doesn't mean that you should get what you want, have your cake and eat it to, and then make your call superior to everyone else's and make everything one sided. The world doesn't work that way. 

Modifié par Br3ad, 31 octobre 2013 - 02:47 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

osbornep wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

You keep using that word. I don't think it means what you think it means. In fact, I know it doesn't.

Deductions are (in logical arguments) considered little more than conclusions drawn from hypothesis, supposition, and assumption based off of a general premise that is often prejudged by the person postulating the premise and deduction. You're assuming that your general premise is right, and that your conclusion, based on your deduction from your premise, is also correct. 

You don't have a sound argument since your premise, which is overwhelmingly seen as an imposition of your own beliefs, values, preferences, etc. is true as a whole for gamers (it's not). Your conclusion could possibly be valid, but your general premise, and thus your deduction (and thus, your argument) isn't sound.

Deductive reasoning in non-objective settings and terms (that is, non-mathematical or non-propositional and predicate logic) is not something that is taken seriously in logical debate. It's considered a skill that is developed without education or training. As such, it's not generally taught at higher levels of acadamia outside of logical calculus and mathematics. In high school for example, students are expected to use reasoning and logic at different and higher skill levels than deductive reasoning.

So because you make a deduction, it is not automatically correct, sound, or valid. A deduction is in logical argumentation, as I already stated, a form of prejudiced hypothesis, supposition, and, most importantly, assumption. I'm not saying it can't be used, but it can only be used correctly. You are not using it correctly.

A deductive argument is simply one in which, given the truth of the premises, the conclusion can't be denied without contradiction. There's no general requirement that the premises be general and the conclusion particular. Nor is deductive reasoning a 'lower' form of reasoning than any other. If I can editorialize a bit, I'd say that the fact that deductive reasoning isn't taught outside the college level isn't a good thing: People fail the Wason Selection Task over 90% of the time.

I think the issue here was that the poster, David, was assuming the premise to be true based on his own values and judgements. His premise was along the lines of assuming that his judgements of people in general were correct based on an etymological fallacy that he may or may not have been deliberately utilizing to support his argument, which itself is flawed as it is based on objectively trying to prove an opinion. He's creating a particular premise and coming to a simultaneously general and particular conclusion, if that makes sense. He seemed lke he was trying to force his particular conclusion about people and make it a generalization that he trends against, ostensibly to try to add credibility to his position.

Having said all of that, I haven't seen any indication that David was actually employing a deductive argument.

I'd agree, but based on his own statements, he was trying to make some kind of deductive experiment to reach the conclusion (which he already assumed to be invariably correct). So I say that while he did 'try' to employ a deductive argument, it was really only that because he said that was what he was doing. Otherwise, I agree with your judgement.

Returning to the topic, I'm in general agreement that there probably should not be a clearly "best" ending (the Inquisitor and all his or her buddies live, waifu reunion, all is well in Thedas, etc.). This is because of the kind of choices Bioware tends to give us, which pit value systems against each other: Are you a hard-headed utilitarian willing to do Whatever It Takes To Get The Job Done, or do you have a more Paragon-minded, deontological approach? A "best" ending can't help but be a tacit judgment that the choices you made to get to that ending are the 'right' ones to make, and I'm not so sure the game should be in the business of making those judgments.

I do agree with this.

[ImperatorMortis]

Br3ad wrote...

ImperatorMortis wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

I don't play games to be heroic.
I don't play games to be Jeebus.
I don't play games so I can have control that I lack in real life.
I don't play games to live out my fantasies.
I don't play games to escape my suicidal thoughts.
I don't play games because it gives me a way to get out my frustrations.
I don't play video games to forget real life.

Am I the only one who just wants to and does play video games to hear a compelling story, to see a compelling world, to experience both and remember it as quality entertainment? Not to force my morals onto every single character, especially my own? Not to save the world from what I think it needs saving from? To make a statement about mankind? To just play a video game for an hour? Why should making "heroic" choices matter?

Just because you prefer this doesn't mean every does. Don't get me wrong you should get whatever ending you want or a equivalent, but some of us enjoy playing through a game, and having certain decisions we've made let us have our "perfect" ending.

This is a RPG that advertises choice, its not a novel. 

Choice doesn't =believe what I believe, anymore than fruit=apple. Having a choice doesn't mean that you should get what you want, have your cake and eat it to, and then make your call superior to everyone else's and make everything one sided. The world doesn't work that way. 

Its a video game, not the real world. People want to experience different endings, the super happy ones, the melancholy ones, the "You lose" ones. In a RPG like this its expected that all these options are catered to. Especially the perfect ending scenario. 

Do you want another Mass Effect 3 ending fiasco? 

[crimzontearz]

Br3ad wrote...

ImperatorMortis wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

I don't play games to be heroic.
I don't play games to be Jeebus.
I don't play games so I can have control that I lack in real life.
I don't play games to live out my fantasies.
I don't play games to escape my suicidal thoughts.
I don't play games because it gives me a way to get out my frustrations.
I don't play video games to forget real life.

Am I the only one who just wants to and does play video games to hear a compelling story, to see a compelling world, to experience both and remember it as quality entertainment? Not to force my morals onto every single character, especially my own? Not to save the world from what I think it needs saving from? To make a statement about mankind? To just play a video game for an hour? Why should making "heroic" choices matter?

Just because you prefer this doesn't mean every does. Don't get me wrong you should get whatever ending you want or a equivalent, but some of us enjoy playing through a game, and having certain decisions we've made let us have our "perfect" ending.

This is a RPG that advertises choice, its not a novel. 

Choice doesn't =believe what I believe, anymore than fruit=apple. Having a choice doesn't mean that you should get what you want, have your cake and eat it to, and then make your call superior to everyone else's and make everything one sided. The world doesn't work that way. 

the reasons why you play a game, the parts that give you enjoyment and those that don't are entirely subjective.

At this point since the existence (yes the very existence as an option) of an "golden ending" might spoil your fun entirely your subjective tastes are entirely incompatible with those of many other people.

So the question becomes "who does bioware cater to?"

As these are tastes none is inherently more valid than the next, so, why yours over those of others?

[The Heretic of Time]

ImperatorMortis wrote...

Its a video game, not the real world. People want to experience different endings, the super happy ones, the melancholy ones, the "You lose" ones. In a RPG like this its expected that all these options are catered to. Especially the perfect ending scenario. 

Do you want another Mass Effect 3 ending fiasco? 

I'm all for a "super happy " option, next to a "you lose" ending option and a "bittersweet" ending option. I do however, think that the "super happy" ending option should be EARNED and not be given away to any player who wants it without the willingness to put effort in it.

A good example would be Heavy Rain, in which there was only one "super happy" ending scenario (among the 25 different ending scenarios, yes, TWENTY-FIVE) and that one single "super happy" ending scenario was actually quite difficult to achieve. Getting that ending on my 2nd playthrough felt rather good and satisfying. It felt like I actually accomplished something (because I did) and it felt like I actually DESERVED the "super happy" ending.

Modifié par Heretic_Hanar, 31 octobre 2013 - 02:58 .

[Redbelle]

Allan Schumacher wrote...



Just as a note, since this is apparently a trigger phrase for some people, I can understand and empathize with the "too gamey" angle.

No, I'm never oblivious to the fact that I'm in a video game, but there are things that ostensibly pull me out of the experience.

In some ways I rationalize by simply having a suspension of disbelief (most combat in most games, RPG or otherwise), but sometimes I get invested in the story and characters and something ends up happening in the game that pulls me out and makes it feel as though it was included simply because "it's a video game and a video game must have this identifiable feature."

*Snip*

If we use the term gamey to describe..... something that pulls you out of the experience, then I've something to add to the removal of emersion..... And I apoligise for using ME3 in a DA thread, but I think it highlights a wider topic of continuity throughout games.....

Shepard lost his Heavy Weapon loadout.

Having become used to having the weapon of last resort in my aresnel, and this is going way back to when ME2 was played, I hoped to find one in ME3..... but not coming across any that could be added permantly, and then the lack of mini game hacks to open doors and terminals etc..... That broke me out of my immersive state in that there were things I wanted to see that were not appearing. Hence, not having past element's of gameplay can be described as being to gamey.

I mention this example in the hope that for DA:I, the lockpicking and such remain's intact...... But that's not the be all and end all.....

I read a story about how a BW fan with a muscle disease found things like hacking in ME problematic and would wait for a friend to come and open things for him. As such, I imagine this individual found ME3, not video gamey. And that's great that BW games can be played by a wide audience. But in doing so they left your truely behind. The game lacked things I enjoyed.......

...... and BW seem to have the answer staring at them, but that did not get the kind of treatment to make the game enjoyable to both.

The mode system of RPG, Action, Story, seems like a good system to cater to the multiple needs of individual gamers. Those who like the story. Those who like the story and action. Those who only want to drop in a shoot things......

Yet I can't help but feel that BW missed out by having the more RPG element's in RPG mode, while stripping them out for action mode.

If DA:I intends a similar mode to cater to it's gamer's then I hope they will think about making a game with the diversion's of traditional RPG's that can be actioned out for action players, while RPG player's can lockpick to their heart's content.

[Br3admax]

ImperatorMortis wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

ImperatorMortis wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

I don't play games to be heroic.
I don't play games to be Jeebus.
I don't play games so I can have control that I lack in real life.
I don't play games to live out my fantasies.
I don't play games to escape my suicidal thoughts.
I don't play games because it gives me a way to get out my frustrations.
I don't play video games to forget real life.

Am I the only one who just wants to and does play video games to hear a compelling story, to see a compelling world, to experience both and remember it as quality entertainment? Not to force my morals onto every single character, especially my own? Not to save the world from what I think it needs saving from? To make a statement about mankind? To just play a video game for an hour? Why should making "heroic" choices matter?

Just because you prefer this doesn't mean every does. Don't get me wrong you should get whatever ending you want or a equivalent, but some of us enjoy playing through a game, and having certain decisions we've made let us have our "perfect" ending.

This is a RPG that advertises choice, its not a novel. 

Choice doesn't =believe what I believe, anymore than fruit=apple. Having a choice doesn't mean that you should get what you want, have your cake and eat it to, and then make your call superior to everyone else's and make everything one sided. The world doesn't work that way. 

Its a video game, not the real world. People want to experience different endings, the super happy ones, the melancholy ones, the "You lose" ones. In a RPG like this its expected that all these options are catered to. Especially the perfect ending scenario. 

Do you want another Mass Effect 3 ending fiasco? 

ME3's ending being sad is not what was wrong with ME3's ending. If the same things happened with smiley faces, I would still be just as disappointed. And to be frank for a second, what other choices could you have possibly taken? Choice is not the problem here. 

Modifié par Br3ad, 31 octobre 2013 - 02:57 .

[ImperatorMortis]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

I'm all for a "super happy " option, next to a "you lose" ending option and a "bittersweet" ending option. I do however, think that the "super happy" ending option should be EARNED and not be given away to any player who wants it without the willingness to put effort in it.

A good example would be Heavy Rain, in which there was only one "super happy" ending scenario (among the 25 different ending scenarios, yes, TWENTI-FIVE) and that one single "super happy" ending scenario was actually quite difficult to achieve. Getting that ending on my 2nd playthrough felt rather good and satisfying. It felt like I actually accomplished something (because I did) and it felt like I actually DESERVED the "super happy" ending.

Oh I definitely agree with that 100%. I'm not saying that the super happy ending should be given away. You definitely should have to earn it. 

I'm just saying that it needs to be there. 

[Iakus]

Xilizhra wrote...

And I think Redeemer is the best. And neither of us is wrong

Forgive me if this sounds flippant, but how is "recruit the guy you hate and then destroy his soul" the most heroic option?

It's heroic for Loghain. He volunteers for it

"I have done...so much wrong.  Allow me to do one last thing right"

I don't say it's the "most heroic" or even teh "best" ending.  Arguments can be made for other endings.  But it's the ending that works best for me.  The price to be paid (strained relationship with Alistair, Morigan abandoning you, Loghain's treason fading into the background of his slaying the archdemon) are worth it.

That's what gets forgotten:  when people say there has to be a price for survival:  the price has to be worth it.

If you offer a number of prices to pay, you stand a better chance of finding one that's palatable to a given player.

[crimzontearz]

Heretic_Hanar wrote...

ImperatorMortis wrote...

Its a video game, not the real world. People want to experience different endings, the super happy ones, the melancholy ones, the "You lose" ones. In a RPG like this its expected that all these options are catered to. Especially the perfect ending scenario. 

Do you want another Mass Effect 3 ending fiasco? 

I'm all for a "super happy " option, next to a "you lose" ending option and a "bittersweet" ending option. I do however, think that the "super happy" ending option should be EARNED and not be given away to any player who wants it without the willingness to put effort in it.

A good example would be Heavy Rain, in which there was only one "super happy" ending scenario (among the 25 different ending scenarios, yes, TWENTI-FIVE) and that one single "super happy" ending scenario was actually quite difficult to achieve. Getting that ending on my 2nd playthrough felt rather good and satisfying. It felt like I actually accomplished something (because I did) and it felt like I actually DESERVED the "super happy" ending.

but see therein lays the problem


 
For some people the EXISTENCE of an option to have a super happy ending and "you fail mortal" ending and shades of gray in between is unacceptable as, somehow, it sullies their experience


 
I proposed a solution long ago for this problem but it did not seem to get traction

Modifié par crimzontearz, 31 octobre 2013 - 02:59 .

[dreamgazer]

ImperatorMortis wrote...

Its a video game, not the real world. People want to experience different endings, the super happy ones, the melancholy ones, the "You lose" ones. In a RPG like this its expected that all these options are catered to. Especially the perfect ending scenario. 

Do you want another Mass Effect 3 ending fiasco? 

No, but I'd love to see an improved version of ME3's ending, full of legitimately tough, balanced choices (and reasonable logic) that the PC can't escape from. 

[Br3admax]

crimzontearz wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

ImperatorMortis wrote...

Br3ad wrote...

I don't play games to be heroic.
I don't play games to be Jeebus.
I don't play games so I can have control that I lack in real life.
I don't play games to live out my fantasies.
I don't play games to escape my suicidal thoughts.
I don't play games because it gives me a way to get out my frustrations.
I don't play video games to forget real life.

Am I the only one who just wants to and does play video games to hear a compelling story, to see a compelling world, to experience both and remember it as quality entertainment? Not to force my morals onto every single character, especially my own? Not to save the world from what I think it needs saving from? To make a statement about mankind? To just play a video game for an hour? Why should making "heroic" choices matter?

Just because you prefer this doesn't mean every does. Don't get me wrong you should get whatever ending you want or a equivalent, but some of us enjoy playing through a game, and having certain decisions we've made let us have our "perfect" ending.

This is a RPG that advertises choice, its not a novel. 

Choice doesn't =believe what I believe, anymore than fruit=apple. Having a choice doesn't mean that you should get what you want, have your cake and eat it to, and then make your call superior to everyone else's and make everything one sided. The world doesn't work that way. 

the reasons why you play a game, the parts that give you enjoyment and those that don't are entirely subjective.

At this point since the existence (yes the very existence as an option) of an "golden ending" might spoil your fun entirely your subjective tastes are entirely incompatible with those of many other people.

So the question becomes "who does bioware cater to?"

As these are tastes none is inherently more valid than the next, so, why yours over those of others?

1. Not the point.
2. That's great, my choices should stil matter just as much you want theirs too. Nothing should make siding with mages superior to siding with Templars, for instance. Siding with mages should not be what allows me to survive a thunderstorm, for a really simple example.
3. They should cater to no one. Everyone's problem is that they think that they are special and that BioWare should cater to them and what they want. They should show that every customer and consumer is just as valuable as the next. 

[Iakus]

Br3ad wrote...

ME3's ending being sad is not what was wrong with ME3's ending. If the same things happened with smiley faces, I would still be just as disappointed. And to be frank for a second, what other choices could you have possibly taken? Choice is not the problem here. 

Well, EC is pretty much the same thing happening with smiley faces

But we're getting off track here.

It's reasonable to be disappointed with "and everything worked out perfectly in the end" aas well.  Though I'll argue that in general, the populace prefers happy endings, so such an outcome won't generate as much dissappointment.  Which is why it's generally "safer" to skew happy when in doubt.

But the issue here is unavoidable death of the protagonist.  And whether some price needs to be paid for his/her survival.  ME3's ending had numerous problems, and one of them was Shepard's ultimate fate.  It wasn't the only problem to be sure.  But it was a factor, and not a small one.