384 réponses à ce sujet

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Deathsaurer wrote...

You obviously don't know David.

**** please. 

[David7204]

themikefest wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Even worse crap.

Explanation on why its crap in your opinion and what you would prefer.

On top of all the contrived garbage the Crucible already has going for it, as well as the ridiculousness of leaving a dozen plot threads hanging...

You do not give the good guys a plan, and then have the plan work perfectly and everyone live happily ever after. Never. It never happens. There is not one single mission in Mass Effect where things go to plan, except perhaps the very, very short side missions that don't qualify as stories at all.

If there is a plan, things cannot go according to it. If they do, the plan becomes a spoiler.

There is no drama, no tension, and no narrative value in watching things unfold exactly as the audience was told they would unfold. And that's exactly what this is. A good story always introduces new challenges and new information right until the very end. Not doing so is a boring cop out and very bad writing.

Modifié par David7204, 26 novembre 2013 - 06:08 .

[Jorji Costava]

There's only one man who can definitively settle the question of what's crap and what's not, and that's Colin Mochrie.

[SlottsMachine]

Davy and I go way back. We played Dead Space 3 all the time back in the day. Best game ever!

[Rusty Sandusky]

[BaladasDemnevanni]

It's David making an ass of himself, as usual.

It's a shame because he occasionally has a good point, which is hidden by his foaming at the mouth crazy.

[Rasofe]

David7204 wrote...

themikefest wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Even worse crap.

Explanation on why its crap in your opinion and what you would prefer.

On top of all the contrived garbage the Crucible already has going for it, as well as the ridiculousness of leaving a dozen plot threads hanging...

You do not give the good guys a plan, and then have the plan work perfectly and everyone live happily ever after. Never. It never happens. There is not one single mission in Mass Effect where things go to plan, except perhaps the very, very short side missions that don't qualify as stories at all.

If there is a plan, things cannot go according to it. If they do, the plan becomes a spoiler.

There is no drama, no tension, and no narrative value in watching things unfold exactly as the audience was told they would unfold. And that's exactly what this is. A good story always introduces new challenges and new information right until the very end. Not doing so is a boring cop out and very bad writing.

Well, yeah, I dunno about it being bad writing, but I didn't expect Illusive Man to show up and make me shoot Anderson. But I accepted that. A twist here and there is a good thing.
What you're saying is that a lot of contrived garbage being the basis of a plotpoint means that same plot point has to have a correspondingly out-of-mind twist. While what you say about the plan being a spoiler if it goes perfectly is true, the part about making the twist incomprehensible or ambigious is not really in the rule book.

[Rasofe]

And what does this have to do with Citadel DLC?

eyezonlyii wrote...

Part of me really gets irritated when David posts, because I know there's nothing that anyone can post that can appease him. None of our ideas, are good enough, because...whatever.

I think we should just ignore him.

This is something that should've been passed as a site rule, quite clearly long ago.

Modifié par Rasofe, 26 novembre 2013 - 12:02 .

[Rasofe]

David7204 wrote...

I'd be happy to give an explanation for whoever asks.

Take these ideas, for instance. They suck primary because they have nothing to do with Shepard. And that's stupid. The Reapers are defeated because someone else builds a bajillion Thanix guns. Because someone else builds a bajillion nukes. Because someone else builds a bajillion lasers. And that is incredibly poor writing. Why are we even bothering to tell a story about Shepard if it turns out Shepard has nothing to do with the resolution of the central conflict?

Of course, that's only the primary fault. There are about a half dozen others.

Aside from the fact that you and the people humoring you have managed to once again span another endless and pointless argument, Shepard's role would have to be the same as ME3's which is to unite the galaxy to beat the Reapers with brute force. The central conflict being cooperation versus domination as responses to expanding Horizons, Shepard would be pivotal in resolving it and that's quite frankly Shepard's main character development engine.

I do have an answer to people who say "why not previous cycles?" Because of Spiral Coils. The current cycle might simply have developed the necessary traits due to the Reapers' evolutionary interference to be strong or cooperative enough to beat the Reaper's with military force. That's what the speech at the end of ME1 was hinting toward.
Of course, once you admit that the Reapers can't be beaten through military force because of *sigh* consistency, then we have a problem.

Modifié par Rasofe, 26 novembre 2013 - 11:55 .

[Ryzaki]

To be fair the Reapers might've been beaten through military force but ME2 threw any chance for that out of the window (and then ME3 made it even worse).

Also why does it seem like Sovereign is weaker than the rest of the Reapers?