217 réponses à ce sujet

[Dean_the_Young]

iakus wrote...

AlanC9 wrote...

No. My way tells everyone that their Shepards made real choices, and the sequel is set in one particular future that one particular Shepard created.

I think the real substance is that I want the morally conflicted nature of the ME3 choices to remain part of the ME universe. You want the ME universe rewritten so that this isn't part of the universe.

Baggage is a good thing.

Well, except for the fact that Bioware tried to remove all the moral conflict of the endings ("Don't worry, no matter what you chose, everything turned out just peachy!") even if it did stink of a desperate whitewash.

How do you get that?

The premise I got was 'life moves on, and the galaxy recovers'- which, considering the whole nihilistic 'the relays destroy everything' crowd before the EC, was kind of a reactionary point. But the endings never deny or pretend the costs you accumulated don't exist- dead species are dead, Reapers are around (or not), and while there's a bit of hope there's also a good deal of ambiguity about what the future actually entails.

How you get 'remove all the moral conflict of the endings' from that, I don't know. I suppose it's because there's not enough wailing by the credits about how immoral Shepard acting (or not) with limited options, and so the lack of some karmic devastator is an insult to your morality. Or something.

In any event,  what's wrong with choosing an a particular future that doesn't match anyone's ending?  How about a future where Shepard was the one wounde don teh beam run, and Liara met the Catalyst?  Or James?  Or Javik?

Nothing... so long as you acknowledge that it's head canon, and stop trying to treat it as canon or trying to push your headcanon as the canon for everyone else.

How about a future where the Crucible did something other than teh three choices?  One where it rendered all eezo inert, for example?  (fuscia ending?)

Interesting fanfic, failure for a sequel.

An ending where TIM died at Cronos Station, and the Citadel was never moved to Earth, leading to a very different Catalyst meeting.

Why bother?

Why are you limiting yourself to "canon" endings if all our Shepards "made real choices" but not everyone's choices get to be honored?  If you're going to ignore some people's chocies, why not ignore everyone's choices?

Because some of us don't beleive to reducto ad absurdum fallacies?

 The reason not to ignore everyone's choices is resources and a desire to maintain a degree of narrative cohesion, and that limited carryover has become a hat of Bioware's. The reason to ignore some choices is limited resources and excessive divergence.

[dreamgazer]

I don't dislike Shepard the way Seb and Mole do, but it's pretty easy to see areas where the team could vastly improve on the Shepard empty-vessel model.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

dreamgazer wrote...

I don't dislike Shepard the way Seb and Mole do, but it's pretty easy to see areas where the team could vastly improve on the Shepard empty-vessel model.

I'm sorry, I just can't help but snigger when they talk about bad tactics and leadership from Shepard.

As I've said before, to some people, Shepard (and other BW protagonists) are empty bricks, and to others, Shepard is a blank canvas or slate for the player to headcanon with. I don't understand why people are so negative towards headcanon anyway when the people making it make no delusion of thinking that its anything more than subjective.

I rather enjoy it. I love being able to dictate, to Role-play, characters.

Modifié par MassivelyEffective0730, 26 décembre 2013 - 06:25 .

[MassivelyEffective0730]

EntropicAngel wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

I don't dislike Shepard the way Seb and Mole do, but it's pretty easy to see areas where the team could vastly improve on the Shepard empty-vessel model.

Such as?

I'm curious. Shepard must straddle to gap between defined character in a cinematic game + "blank enough" slate for the player to roleplay. It's not an easy position to be in.

Indeed. BW tried to hit both, and ended up missing on both. 

Personally, I prefer, if both cannot be met, that they stick to the blank slate for the player to RP. That's more important to me than cinematic games and cut-scenes.

[spirosz]

I agree, but Bioware wants to push that cinematic experience, as do other developers, so I guess there had to be a compromise, sadly.

[Iakus]

Dean_the_Young wrote...

How you get 'remove all the moral conflict of the endings' from that, I don't know. I suppose it's because there's not enough wailing by the credits about how immoral Shepard acting (or not) with limited options, and so the lack of some karmic devastator is an insult to your morality. Or something.

Because Bioware bent over backwards (to hilarious extremes at time) to make every option the "right" option.  Virtually all moral ambiguity is removed in EC.

Nothing... so long as you acknowledge that it's head canon, and stop trying to treat it as canon or trying to push your headcanon as the canon for everyone else.

WTF are you talking about?  I'm suggesting that if Bioware is going to take a "this particular timeline" option to the next game, go with one that's not canon for anybody.  And ending no one can achieve, so no one can claim favoritism!

How about a future where the Crucible did something other than teh three choices?  One where it rendered all eezo inert, for example?  (fuscia ending?)

Interesting fanfic, failure for a sequel.

Because some of us don't beleive to reducto ad absurdum fallacies?

Not sure if serious or troll 

 The reason not to ignore everyone's choices is resources and a desire to maintain a degree of narrative cohesion, and that limited carryover has become a hat of Bioware's. The reason to ignore some choices is limited resources and excessive divergence.

Given the endings, trying to maintain narrative cohesion is impossible.  Heck, cohesion left the building as soon as Shepard got to choose if the genophage was cured or not.  There are simply too many possible permutations for the state of the galaxy.  Bioware couldn't keep track of a dozen characters being alive or dead.  

So I say scrap it all.  EIther make it so vague pretty much anyone's headcanon will fit into it, or pick a noncanon ending to make "canon" But dont' try to shoehorn all the possible galactic states the trilogy created.  

[MassivelyEffective0730]

iakus wrote...

Dean_the_Young wrote...

How you get 'remove all the moral conflict of the endings' from that, I don't know. I suppose it's because there's not enough wailing by the credits about how immoral Shepard acting (or not) with limited options, and so the lack of some karmic devastator is an insult to your morality. Or something.

Because Bioware bent over backwards (to hilarious extremes at time) to make every option the "right" option.  Virtually all moral ambiguity is removed in EC.

That isn't necessarily moral ambiguity, but it sounds like you're more upset with them not giving a clear, defined morally right option (it was synthesis by the way) so much as you're looking for a black and white styled ending where you can do everything you want without having to pay too much for it.

[dreamgazer]

EntropicAngel wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

I don't dislike Shepard the way Seb and Mole do, but it's pretty easy to see areas where the team could vastly improve on the Shepard empty-vessel model.

Such as?

I'm curious. Shepard must straddle to gap between defined character in a cinematic game + "blank enough" slate for the player to roleplay. It's not an easy position to be in.

I agree, it's not easy, but it can be done with a firmer grasp on in-character common sense and less of a focus on the bipolar morality system.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

dreamgazer wrote...

EntropicAngel wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

I don't dislike Shepard the way Seb and Mole do, but it's pretty easy to see areas where the team could vastly improve on the Shepard empty-vessel model.

Such as?

I'm curious. Shepard must straddle to gap between defined character in a cinematic game + "blank enough" slate for the player to roleplay. It's not an easy position to be in.

I agree, it's not easy, but it can be done with a firmer grasp on in-character common sense and less of a focus on the bipolar morality system.

Indeed. For decisions Shepard makes that might need to be canonized, I'd rather he did make them based on logic and rationale rather than morality.

[dreamgazer]

EntropicAngel wrote...

dreamgazer wrote...

I agree, it's not easy, but it can be done with a firmer grasp on in-character common sense and less of a focus on the bipolar morality system.

I'm mostly looking for an example of some kind, pointing out something that could have been improved. Because I'll be honest, "in-character common sense" is pretty vague.

It's vague because it applies to a lot of scenarios across the series.

For instance, Shepard's conversation with Wrex about the genophage in ME1.

[Iakus]

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

That isn't necessarily moral ambiguity, but it sounds like you're more upset with them not giving a clear, defined morally right option (it was synthesis by the way) so much as you're looking for a black and white styled ending where you can do everything you want without having to pay too much for it.

What they did was sidestep the very details people protested against in the endings.  Such details were either left unmentioned or implied to be irrelevant.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

iakus wrote...

MassivelyEffective0730 wrote...

That isn't necessarily moral ambiguity, but it sounds like you're more upset with them not giving a clear, defined morally right option (it was synthesis by the way) so much as you're looking for a black and white styled ending where you can do everything you want without having to pay too much for it.

What they did was sidestep the very details people protested against in the endings.  Such details were either left unmentioned or implied to be irrelevant.

What details were those (your idea).

[NeonFlux117]

Renegade Shepard is hilarious. He's an ends justify the means type of guy. I can see where some might allude to the perceptive that Paragon Shepard is "bland", but really, Renegade Shep is where it's at. Except for killing wrex. I can't do that. But everything else is good stuff.

You haven't really experience the Shepard Saga until you've done a full renegade or near full renegade play through. I think Shepard's character is really well done with that type of playthrough. Although, there are some things that I do go against the grain- like killing wrex and giving up legion in ME2. I think the renegade and paragon system needs to be refined in the next game. It is very one sided, lol. I guess that's kinda the point.

Everything in the game is kinda like that- black and white choice. Right or Left. Paragon or Renegade.

Modifié par NeonFlux117, 26 décembre 2013 - 06:57 .