876 réponses à ce sujet

[Mr.House]

Morocco Mole wrote...

are you people really so daft and depressing that you take a scene of the main character taking a breath at the end his death? Even the Bioware quote was in jest.

But Morocco no waifu scene so cleary Shepard dies.

[Iakus]

Mr.House wrote...
Better then sacerfice all humans or don't and hope to god you can find a away to stop dark energy from killing you which you probaly won't.

Least with the current endings you can still kill the Reapers with only EDi and possbily the geth dying.

ME was going to end bleak, the issue is how it was done. Plenty of stories which made it clear where not going to end happy(one of them in my avie) pulled it off great, I wish people would stop saying the issues with ME3s ending was it being bleak.

Even before the endings, yeah things were set up for a not entirely happy ending.  Billions die in the war, including several of Shepard's friends and companions.  How many depends on previous choices, but you will lose some. 

But the endings we got force Shepard to do something horrific.  You simply get to choose the horror.  And in one case, can maybe live through it.

It's bleak in that Shepard must become a monster not unlike the Reapers themselves (literally or figuratively) in order to "win"  I don't know how refusing to sacrifice humanity in this "dark energy" ending would have played out.  but if it didn't end like Refuse in a rolfstomp trolling by Bioware, it might have been worth pursuing.

[Iakus]

Sion1138 wrote...

I appreciate 2001: The Space Odyssey.

I also appreciate Star Wars.

I do not appreciate Star Wars: The Space Odyssey.

Good way to put it

[crimzontearz]

ME was going to end bleak, the issue is how it was done. Plenty of stories which made it clear where not going to end happy(one of them in my avie) pulled it off great, I wish people would stop saying the issues with ME3s ending was it being bleak.

I disagree. ME never made it clear that it was going to end bleak, no more than say star wars.

Secondly, yes that was the issue for me, as in real life I will take a dish that has presentation flaws but tastes great so in my narrative entertainment I will happily forgive faulty writing for positive emotional payoff

[Mr.House]

crimzontearz wrote...

Pretty much. Shepard's life has, frankly sucked. After saving the galaxy multiple times, he/she deserved the opportunity to retire in peace. Not spend all eternity in rubble

agreed

Shepard will die in a few days if no one gets to him/her, so it won't be an eternity, unless you mean Shepards dead body will be there which is false as his dead body would be found when they fix the Citadel.

[Sion1138]

Psychevore wrote...

Why?

I am perfectly fine with Shepard being Schrodinger's Cat.

It's a role-playing game man, some people play the role. While they are playing, they are Shepard. 

So it's perfectly understandable why they feel the way they do.

[Iakus]

Morocco Mole wrote...

are you people really so daft and depressing that you take a scene of the main character taking a breath at the end his death? Even the Bioware quote was in jest.

Context is everything.  The scene is deliberately ambiguous where Shepard's death in all other endings is not.

[Mr.House]

crimzontearz wrote...

ME was going to end bleak, the issue is how it was done. Plenty of stories which made it clear where not going to end happy(one of them in my avie) pulled it off great, I wish people would stop saying the issues with ME3s ending was it being bleak.

I disagree. ME never made it clear that it was going to end bleak, no more than say star wars.

Secondly, yes that was the issue for me, as in real life I will take a dish that has presentation flaws but tastes great so in my narrative entertainment I will happily forgive faulty writing for positive emotional payoff

If you really thought the ending to the trilogy was going to be happy you didn't pay attention at all to the first game, also you just outright admitted you rather have power fantasy then a well written story.

Modifié par Mr.House, 05 décembre 2013 - 05:03 .

[Iakus]

Morocco Mole wrote...

You are forced to sacrifice the entire human race or condemn the galaxy to a slow death.

If you people can't even headcanon the breath scene as Shepard being alive you people would have gone into depression induced catatonia from that.

You are forced to sacrifice the human race for a near-certain answer, or risk the entire galaxy in hopes of finding another way.

Unless it showed the galaxy losing that fight (like Refuse does) it's potentially viable. 

[crimzontearz]

But Morocco no waifu scene so cleary Shepard dies.

public word of god said otherwise, context is left purposefully ambiguous (where it would have coated them nothing to add a reunion slider) and even Gaider did say "author intent means nothing if the public receives it wrong"

[Mr.House]

iakus wrote...

Morocco Mole wrote...

You are forced to sacrifice the entire human race or condemn the galaxy to a slow death.

If you people can't even headcanon the breath scene as Shepard being alive you people would have gone into depression induced catatonia from that.

You are forced to sacrifice the human race for a near-certain answer, or risk the entire galaxy in hopes of finding another way.

Unless it showed the galaxy losing that fight (like Refuse does) it's potentially viable. 

If you can not headcanon Shepard survives in destroy there is no way you can headcanon a positive outcome from the sacerfice all humans or risk it all in vain hope. If you can headcanon hope in something like that, then you can do the same dam thing for destroy, you and others just don't want to.

Modifié par Mr.House, 05 décembre 2013 - 05:13 .

[Sion1138]

Mr.House wrote...

If you really thought the ending to the trilogy was going to be happy you didn't pay attention at all to the first game, also you just outright admitted you rather have power fantasy then a well written story.

What do you mean and what is 'power fantasy'?

[Farangbaa]

Sion1138 wrote...

Psychevore wrote...

Why?

I am perfectly fine with Shepard being Schrodinger's Cat.

It's a role-playing game man, some people play the role. While they are playing, they are Shepard. 

So it's perfectly understandable why they feel the way they do.

I suppose that's where the difference lies. Because when I play, I try to make Shepard me.

[Nitrocuban]

The whole "u too stupid to comprehend" thing is problematic cause it sounds cool at first but even trying to explain it later will end in failure
They should have solved that with some temporal paradox time travel weirdness that still sounds cool and we actually can't comprehend.
Shepard causing an event that destroys the whole universe. Like a Spacetimesplosion that propagates backwards in time hindering the Big Bang from happening and the Reapers found evidence for it over 9000 quadrillion years ago, try to stop all races since then from causing the event and finally we realise the Crucible causes this extinction event and the Reaper are reason and consequence cause the f***ed with dark energy tachyon thingies first.

[Iakus]

Mr.House wrote...
If you can not headcanon Shepard survives in destroy there is no way you can headcanon a positive outcome from the sacerfice all humans or risk it all in vain hope. If you can headcanon hope in something like that, then you can do the same dam thing for destroy, you and others just don't want to.

Sure you can, depending on how it's presented.  

Shepard lying in a hospital bed would make it far easier to heacanon his/her survival than lying alone on an abandoned Citadel.

Heck, if Refuse ended with Shepard's "I fight for freedom" speech, rather than "SO BE IT!" and the modified Stargazer scene, I'm sure a number of players would have been content, if not entirely satisfied, in imagining the "conventional victory" they so craved.

[Linkenski]

I know Karpyshyn is formulaic and isn't "impressive" in his writing. You could say Mac might be more... ambitious... I guess? But I don't know because when you read his comics the characterization is just as repetetive as Drew's plot formula is. Everyone is acting edgy and intentionally using bad grammar to sound like d-bags and such.

But more to the point. I like how people are like "Duuh, Karpyshyn is writing gold? Hell no!" But you have games like KotOR and Mass Effect where the plot is pretty coherent and clear at all times, the plot twists don't feel hamfisted (minus saren/Sovereign's merge bossfight :3) and on the other hand you have two games written by Mac. One has a plot that just keeps rehashing itself, and has you travel through an unknown teleporter that no one knows if it means instant death or not (ME2) and another plot has all characters relying on a deus ex machina device to kill all bad guys, but they have no clue what it does before they activate it.

Not gonna deny that the subtext in ME3 is often very strong, plus thematically it has some extraordinary moments, and that's a great but in ME1 things were at least more coherent and didn't rely on idiotic plot-devices, or at least not as idiotic as ME2 and ME3. Still people think Karpyshyn is worse than Mac for some reason, or they're exaggerating.

[Sion1138]

Mr.House wrote...

If you can not headcanon Shepard survives in destroy there is no way you can headcanon a positive outcome from the sacerfice all humans or risk it all in vain hope. If you can headcanon hope in something like that, then you can do the same dam thing for destroy, you and ohers just don't want to.

"You don't want to." doesn't really make sense.

I mean, if they could do so and rid themselves of any disappointment, why wouldn't they?

You are your character only while you inhabit the secondary world (i.e. play the game), once you are outside, you can not know or assume what happened to your character within that world.

You can deliberate on various symbolic elements relating to the real world, if any were present, but this is entirely divorced from your relationship to the character.

Therefore, the fate of what in the secondary world is the embodiment of the player should be made unambiguously clear. Otherwise, you will cause people to become stuck, still uneasy about the experience a year and a half later.

It's a curiosity of the human psyche and perhaps it could be classified as pathological, but it is real. A writer must be aware of this.

Modifié par Sion1138, 05 décembre 2013 - 05:25 .

[Iakus]

Morocco Mole wrote...

Destroy honestly gives you everything you need. Shepard breathing, the LI/Companion not putting the plaque on the wall. It goes so far out of its way to tell you everything is going to be okay (especially in the EC and Citadel) that if you still think Shepard will die in the rubble you are just willfully starting to refuse it on purpose.

Or pointing out how horribly presented it is, compared to the explicit showing of Shepard's death.

If you're going to show Shepard's physical annihilation in most endings, don't dance around Shepard's survival when that happens.

Not to mention the enormous cost to get that scene is highly problematic as well.  Not everyone wants to shoot EDI and the geth in the back, after all.

[Mr.House]

iakus wrote...

Mr.House wrote...
If you can not headcanon Shepard survives in destroy there is no way you can headcanon a positive outcome from the sacerfice all humans or risk it all in vain hope. If you can headcanon hope in something like that, then you can do the same dam thing for destroy, you and others just don't want to.

Sure you can, depending on how it's presented.  

Shepard lying in a hospital bed would make it far easier to heacanon his/her survival than lying alone on an abandoned Citadel.

Heck, if Refuse ended with Shepard's "I fight for freedom" speech, rather than "SO BE IT!" and the modified Stargazer scene, I'm sure a number of players would have been content, if not entirely satisfied, in imagining the "conventional victory" they so craved.

You see a fricken slide with a repaired Citadel, which means they went back to the Citadel. If you can not headcanon that, there is no way in hell you could headcanon hope into Drews ending WHICH is far darker then what Mac did.

Also conventional victory was never going to happen, people who vouch for that need to rewatch the battle with Sovie again.

[Iakus]

Sion1138 wrote...

"You don't want to." doesn't really make sense.

I mean, if they could do so and rid themselves of any disappointment, why wouldn't they?

You are your character only while you inhabit the secondary world (i.e. play the game), once you are outside, you can not know or assume what happened to your character within that world.

You can deliberate on various symbolic elements relating to real world, if any were present, but this is entirely divorced from your relationship to the character.

Therefore, the fate of what in the secondary world is the embodiment of the player should be made unambiguously clear. Otherwise, you will cause people to become stuck, still uneasy about the experience a year and a half later.

It's a curiosity of the human psyche, that this happens and perhaps it could be classified as pathological, but it is real. A writer must be aware of this.

Didn't you hear?  Games are like tv shows.  It's like Breaking Bad and all our Shepards are Walter White. Players have no ownership of thier characters in an rpg 

Modifié par iakus, 05 décembre 2013 - 05:25 .