393 réponses à ce sujet

[KaiserShep]

dreamgazer wrote...

Plenty of linearity and railroading in ME1 (and ME 2), folks. Open thine eyes.

This is why it always puzzles me that people accuse ME3 of this and never seem to notice that the entire series has a fairly fixed plot that you cannot deviate very far from. Hell, I would've liked to be able to ditch Cerberus early on in ME2, but it's not possible.

[Seboist]

dreamgazer wrote...

Plenty of linearity and railroading in ME1 (and ME 2), folks. Open thine eyes.

Indeed, which makes the claim of "our choices didn't matter at the end" all the more comical.

[rapscallioness]

Also, what is this I hear about the Raloi? Is that the maybe!Leaked race that is like a skeletal Turian w/the head of an Independence day movie alien?

All I know abt them is that they apparently scurried abt destroying their tech in hopes the Reapers..uh..wouldn't notice them.

I wonder how they fared? I wonder what kinda of creatures they are? As in if they did fare alright, they wouldn't be the kinda of beings to try and take advantage of our weakened state would they?

Then ofc there's still the Leviathans slinking about. And I don;t trust them as far as I can throw them. Sigh.

[KaiserShep]

And ironic, since the choice at the end has the biggest impact in the entire series' plot.

[Iakus]

Morocco Mole wrote...

If you have a brain, please don't link to tvtropes in an argument about writing.

1) wasn't making an argument, but a humorous comment

2) troll elsewhere pls

[Iakus]

Seboist wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Plenty of linearity and railroading in ME1 (and ME 2), folks. Open thine eyes.

Indeed, which makes the claim of "our choices didn't matter at the end" all the more comical.

The expectation was that the first tow games had to be lienar in order to ensure everyone started out in more or less the same place for the conclusion.  In ME3, the writers would be free to diverge in all sorts of directions since they wouldn't have to worry about an ME4.

Sadly this turned out to be untrue on pretty muc every posible level

[LinksOcarina]

KaiserShep wrote...

And ironic, since the choice at the end has the biggest impact in the entire series' plot.

A while ago I did an editorial on the differences between narrative and plot. It is still relevent in this discussion in the end, because we need to understand that were not changing the plot too fundamentally while we play the game. Rather, we are changing the narrative itself.

So the games were always going to be linear plotwise, right down to the endings. The narrative is what we always influence in the end, with some rare exceptions out there in the gaming world. 

Modifié par LinksOcarina, 30 novembre 2013 - 10:17 .

[crimzontearz]

But but



I LOVE pulpy power fantasies

[trenq]

wright1978 wrote...

iakus wrote...

EC pretty clearly demonstrates they either didn't understand or didn't care what people didn't like.

This interview pretty much confirms that "Your opinion matters only if you agree with us"  (Guess what?  My Shepard isn't and never was Walter White!)

So yeah, I'm pessisitic

Yikes that's a bad interview and doesn't give me much faith that Walters should be working anywhere near an RPG based game. Really comparing a game that has always been about interactive player agency/choice to a TV series with a passive linear nature.

“I loved it. It was heart-wrenching, but I felt it was right for my Shepard.”

said no one ever

[crimzontearz]

And if they did what about those who did not like it?

Oh wait they did not because they did not understand it because lack of context

[PinkysPain]

Seboist wrote...
Not a pulpy power fantasy? Then what's with Alliance reps groveling like retards at Shepard's feet in the intro to stroke the players' ego?

Not too different from Shepard groveling like a retard at the starchild's feet.

And it being a pulpy power fantasy is precisely why there's so much butthurt, this is a fanbase that's used to power tripping as a paragon do gooder jesus figure or a renegade badass troll with no real negative consequence and had the rug pulled from right underneath them at the end .

Or in other words, when it stopped being a power fantasy at the end.

It had nothing to do with bad writing(for which ME3 has plenty of outside of the ending) or "choices not mattering" (series is largely a linear gears clone).

You're awfully persistent in your strawmanning ...

We aren't accusing them of bad writing, but of having a "delusion of artistdom". It was pulp, it turned into pretentious crap.

Modifié par PinkysPain, 30 novembre 2013 - 10:24 .

[Sion1138]

dreamgazer wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

I don't feel like reading a bad article. Please post the lines in question

Walters compared the ending of ME3 with Breaking Bad's. Extremely silly comment.

This guy...

[PinkysPain]

crimzontearz wrote...
I LOVE pulpy power fantasies

Bad wrong fun.

[rapscallioness]

Morocco Mole wrote...

to be quite honest, unless they do a single game and stop trying to make epic trilogies. Your choices are never going to matter in any meaningful fashion. The reason games like Alpha Protocol and the Witcher games work is that they are smart enough to

A.) Confine choices to one game.

B.) Make a canon and brush other choices under the rug and continue with their own story with minimal fuss

Honestly, I'd be quite fine with that. Confining the choices and any repercussions to one outstanding game.I'd like that pretty well, especially if it allowed the players to have the feeling of impact on the outcome of the story.

Preferably with an ending that is the outcome of the paths we took thruout the game. So, if I want to see a how things could be different, I would have to go pretty far back in the game itself to change things.  And then we see the repercussions of those choices at the end.

[Br3admax]

iakus wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

If you have a brain, please don't link to tvtropes in an argument about writing.

1) wasn't making an argument, but a humorous comment

2) troll elsewhere pls

How is he trolling? How was that comment humorous? 

[Br3admax]

iakus wrote...

Seboist wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

Plenty of linearity and railroading in ME1 (and ME 2), folks. Open thine eyes.

Indeed, which makes the claim of "our choices didn't matter at the end" all the more comical.

The expectation was that the first tow games had to be lienar in order to ensure everyone started out in more or less the same place for the conclusion.  In ME3, the writers would be free to diverge in all sorts of directions since they wouldn't have to worry about an ME4.

Sadly this turned out to be untrue on pretty muc every posible level

How is this the writers fault? You should have never expected the story to go a certain way based on the number of games possible. You expected something that you did not recieve. Its no one's fault but your own for thinking the way the story would be told would change. 

[crimzontearz]

Bad wrong fun.

If that is wrong....I don't want to be right

[rapscallioness]

well, i guess the fun speculating part of this thread is dead...again.

[DQX]

Sion1138 wrote...

DQX wrote...

I don't think that will be a problem as it looks like they have committed to eliminate as much of the Shepard trilogy from the script.  How they are going to do that and have any sense of ME remaining is a mystery- and I think a mistake- to me. 

I think you can evolve a sequel storyline without divorcing continuity completely. However, they may have felt like they were burned by KOTOR II- which I felt was too disjointed and trying to carry it was why we don't have KOTOR III..

I think the problem is that there is a big draw in starting from the ground up- there is an adventure aspect to that.  But I also think that there is something that could have been said in moving on with the Dark Lord Revan ... or the son/daughter of Shepard.

KotOR II was written and developed at Obsidian and they probably worked within constraints set by BioWare and LucasArts.

Yep.  One I think they may be imposing on themselves.

[Sion1138]

 "And I think that’s one of the things we really underestimated, which was how much ownership people would take over a character that they could do that. You know, you’ve been given free choice to make all these decisions with this character, with the fates of millions of people, and then, you don’t get to choose your own fate."

McWalters

See, this quote is interesting. It shows that he didn't understand what he was dealing with, now he does.

It's a fundamental insight that I've been arguing must be present to begin with, not arrived at in hindsight.

So, I guess a bit of cautious optimism is in order.

Modifié par Sion1138, 30 novembre 2013 - 11:00 .

[DQX]

Sion1138 wrote...

 "And I think that’s one of the things we really underestimated, which was how much ownership people would take over a character that they could do that. You know, you’ve been given free choice to make all these decisions with this character, with the fates of millions of people, and then, you don’t get to choose your own fate."

McWalters

See, this quote is interesting. It shows that he didn't understand what he was dealing with, now he does.
It's a fundamental insight that I've been arguing must be present to begin with, not arrived at in hindsight.

So, I guess a bit of cautious optimism is in order.

Thanks, Scion

[crimzontearz]

And right after says he would not change a thing tho....