407 réponses à ce sujet

[dreamgazer]

David7204 wrote...

Some people apparently don't have a good understanding of 'coincidences' in stories.

David, you realize snide blanket statements like this make it so nobody takes your comments---and, by extension, you---seriously, right?  

[trenq]

I love David.

[CronoDragoon]

David7204 wrote...

Some people apparently don't have a good understanding of 'coincidences' in stories.

In case this was directed at me, what happens to heroism when coincidence bails the good guys out instead of their hard work and effort?

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 26 novembre 2013 - 02:57 .

[David7204]

CronoDragoon wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Some people apparently don't have a good understanding of 'coincidences' in stories.

In case this was directed at me, what happens to your precious heroism when coincidence bails the good guys out instead of their hard work and effort?

Nothing whatsoever. Coincidence and luck are always part of the hero's success. They have to be.

[AlexMBrennan]

Every time we take out a single reaper we are shown to require combined fire from an entire fleet, and you think conventional victory will be possible? All our fleets are getting curb-stomped the minute they run into reapers, but you think that will all change when Shepard gives the word?

The council hasn't been able to replace the cruisers destroyed by ONE reaper but I'm sure they'll be able to produce the 1000 dreadnoughts we'd need to beat the Reapers easily.

[dreamgazer]

David7204 wrote...

I notice how you abandoned our conversation on the other thread, Dreamgazer, when I was answering every question you asked. I do hope you won't be complaining to me in several days that I've never given you anything?

David, I asked you to handle conventional victory within the space of ME3 and without rewriting ME1 and ME2.  

You didn't do so.

[CronoDragoon]

David7204 wrote...

Nothing whatsoever. Coincidence and luck are always part of the hero's success. They have to be.

Why?

[David7204]

AlexMBrennan wrote...

Every time we take out a single reaper we are shown to require combined fire from an entire fleet, and you think conventional victory will be possible? All our fleets are getting curb-stomped the minute they run into reapers, but you think that will all change when Shepard gives the word?

The council hasn't been able to replace the cruisers destroyed by ONE reaper but I'm sure they'll be able to produce the 1000 dreadnoughts we'd need to beat the Reapers easily.

Maybe you should consider the conflict in terms of more than just dreadnoughts.

Modifié par David7204, 26 novembre 2013 - 02:59 .

[Seboist]

dreamgazer wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Some people apparently don't have a good understanding of 'coincidences' in stories.

David, you realize snide blanket statements like this make it so nobody takes your comments---and, by extension, you---seriously, right?  

I thought asperger boy saying things like "bone and helmet plating are stronger than ship armor" are what made people not take him seriously?

[David7204]

dreamgazer wrote...

David7204 wrote...

I notice how you abandoned our conversation on the other thread, Dreamgazer, when I was answering every question you asked. I do hope you won't be complaining to me in several days that I've never given you anything?

David, I asked you to handle conventional victory within the space of ME3 and without rewriting ME1 and ME2.  

You didn't do so.

Dreamgazer, are you actually going to address the reponse I gave as to why me changing the first two games is different from everyone else doing it? Your reasoning of "Anyone can do it by rewriting the Reapers" holds absolutely zero weight whatsoever since I leave the Reapers perfectly intact as threats. Do you anything else as reasoning? Because right now I see nothing. Nothing at all.

Modifié par David7204, 26 novembre 2013 - 03:02 .

[David7204]

CronoDragoon wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Nothing whatsoever. Coincidence and luck are always part of the hero's success. They have to be.

Why?

Because the universe is complex and luck exists? Because anyone can win with enough good luck and lose with enough bad luck? It's always luck that the hero never dies in mundane circumstances. He doesn't get shot by mooks. He doesn't step on landmines. He doesn't choke on a walnut. Why? Because he's lucky.

Modifié par David7204, 26 novembre 2013 - 03:06 .

[fchopin]

My ending stopped being good at the tea party at the run to the beam scene.

[dreamgazer]

David7204 wrote...

Dreamgazer, are you actually going to address the reponse I gave as to why me changing the first two games is different from everyone else doing it? Your reasoning of "Anyone can do it by rewriting the Reapers" holds absolutely zero weight whatsoever since I leave the Reapers perfectly intact as threats. Do you anything else as reasoning? Because right now I see nothing. Nothing at all.

David7204 wrote...

No Dreamgazer. You see, firstly, unlike everyone else, I don't weaken the Reapers from what we see in ME 3. They're still just as powerful, and just as numerous. They can be taken out with significant firepower, but not much else. 

Secondly, unlike everyone else, the changes I make to the galaxy aren't magic wands. Yes, I would ideally love to introduce stronger fleets, more shipyards, planetary scale shielding, and more forces in general. On a reasonable level. But you see, instead of those improvements being a pointless magic wand that nullifies the entire story, they would very intentionally have almost no narrative impact. ME 3 would proceed with the Reapers succeed just as much as they do currently.

There was no reason to address this response, champ, because it has absolutely no relevance behind what I asked of you: to provide a reasonable explanation for conventional victory while playing with the hand ME1 and ME2 dealt.  You're altering the variables. 

And you're still not offering answers to their destruction, either!  Brute force and heroism can only go so far.

Modifié par dreamgazer, 26 novembre 2013 - 03:07 .

[David7204]

And what, Dreamgazer, is your reasoning for why I'm confined to ME 3? It seems to me these 'variables' were just pulled from a hat.

I could come up with something without altering ME 1 and 2, of course. It wouldn't be as good, but I could do it.

[BaladasDemnevanni]

iakus wrote...

And anything powerful enough to destroy  a Reaper should pretty much fry anything in its path, synthetic or organic.  

Wait, since when do EMPs target organics?

Now, if the EMPs utterly wreck the oxygen supplies on board alliance vessels, that would at least make sense.

[CronoDragoon]

David7204 wrote...
Because the universe is complex and luck exists? Because anyone can win with enough good luck and lose with enough bad luck?

Thank you for proving my point regarding heroism. The more luck is involved, the less heroic the action. With enough good luck, a monkey can save the universe, and in such a story the main character has no meaning. The story would have played out the same regardless, which means no hero.

It's always luck that the hero never dies in mundane circumstances. He doesn't get shot by mooks. He doesn't step on landmines. He doesn't choke on a walnut. Why? Because he's lucky.

Ah but there is a difference between these events and hinging key plot advancements on luck.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 26 novembre 2013 - 03:12 .

[dreamgazer]

David7204 wrote...

And what, Dreamgazer, is your reasoning for why I'm confined to ME 3? It seems to me these 'variables' were just pulled from a hat.

I could come up with something without altering ME 1 and 2, of course. It wouldn't be as good, but I could do it.

Already covered: because anyone can go back and write the Reapers into a more manageable threat, whether it's by nerfing them or buffing their opponents.   It's called working within the established universe.

If you can do the bolded, please do!

Modifié par dreamgazer, 26 novembre 2013 - 03:12 .

[Br3admax]

J. Reezy wrote...

David7204 wrote...

And what, Dreamgazer, is your reasoning for why I'm confined to ME 3? It seems to me these 'variables' were just pulled from a hat.

I could come up with something without altering ME 1 and 2, of course. It wouldn't be as good, but I could do it.

Talk is cheap.

And this from a bard.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

David7204 wrote...

CronoDragoon wrote...

David7204 wrote...

Some people apparently don't have a good understanding of 'coincidences' in stories.

In case this was directed at me, what happens to your precious heroism when coincidence bails the good guys out instead of their hard work and effort?

Nothing whatsoever. Coincidence and luck are always part of the hero's success. They have to be.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Tell that to the boys and girls over in the sand. Tell that to anyone who has ever been in a war. Tell that to anyone who has ever had to perform any kind of wetwork, law enforcement, or public safety. Tell that to anyone who's ever been in the medical, engineering, or physical science field.

No, skill and training trump luck and coincidence every time. You wouldn't have the luck or coincidence if you didn't have the training and skill.

[David7204]

Key plot advancements always depend on luck. It was luck that Shepard was the assigned to ship investigating Eden Prime. Luck that Shepard was the one to receive the vision.

Does that negate Shepard fighting through the geth? Saving Ashley? Helping the colonists? Not in the slightest.

I could of course make the same argument for pretty much any fiction in existence. Is it not 'luck' that out of all the people on the planet, the right characters always meet each other in a story?

[David7204]

dreamgazer wrote...

Already covered: because anyone can go back and write the Reapers into a more manageable threat, whether it's by nerfing them or buffing their opponents.   It's called working within the established universe.

Dreamgazer, I'm having trouble understanding your immense difficulty with this very simple concept. I suppose I wasn't making myself plain enough. None of my changes diminish the Reapers as threats from what we see in ME 3. None of my changes narratively strengthen the galaxy. Do you understand those two sentences? Nothing I do significantly nerfs the Reapers or buffs their opponents. Is that clear enough? Perhaps you've become so used to the magic solutions proposed on the BSN you've forgotten any alternative exists.

You seem to be operating the very, very silly and utterly wrong delusion that if I change things in ME 1 and ME 2, it must be to give myself an easy way out.

Modifié par David7204, 26 novembre 2013 - 03:19 .

[CronoDragoon]

David7204 wrote...

Key plot advancements always depend on luck. It was luck that Shepard was the assigned to ship investigating Eden Prime. Luck that Shepard was the one to receive the vision.

So you keep giving me examples of Mass Effect contrivance as an example of contrivance not being a problem. Instead this just shows how convenient Mass Effect's narrative makes itself.

Does that negate Shepard fighting through the geth? Saving Ashley? Helping the colonists? Not in the slightest.

Actually, it does, because if Shepard doesn't find out Saren was the one behind it, and eventually he opens the relay to dark space and the galaxy loses, none of that means anything.

I could of course make the same argument for pretty much any fiction in existence. Is it not 'luck' that out of all the people on the planet, the right characters always meet each other in a story?

Oh, please do give other arguments for other fictions, and this time try to use plots that aren't gimmicky and contrived. I know that's hard since tvtropes covers mostly games and anime, but I'd appreciate the effort.