170 réponses à ce sujet

[themikefest]

David7204 wrote...

I'm sorry you're too incompetent to imagine any way a satisfying solution could be introduced in ME 3. I can assure you that not everyone in this world shares your shortcomings.

Nor is anyone 'blundering around without a plan.' In ME 2, the characters are concerned about the conflict of ME 2, and in ME 3 the characters are concerned about the conflict of ME 3. A solution would be introduced very early.

So you have now gone from insulting people by saying they're stupid/idiotic/suck to calling them incompetent.

You must have a very lonely life.

[Dilandau3000]

Actually, the solution was "introduced" in ME2. Liara mentions the shadow broker was on to some Prothean secret in LotSB, which was obviously foreshadowing her later discovery at the Mars Archives. Arguably, the delays gave her time to find that, though you won't hear me disagree that the payoff for our efforts in ME1 and ME2 should've been handled better.

Modifié par Dilandau3000, 09 janvier 2014 - 01:17 .

[David7204]

I can agree that ME 2 ideally should have gone further to weaken the Reapers. But weakening is not a solution to the overall conflict. Just as ME 1 weakened them by denying them control over the relays but still keeping them a very significant threat.

Introducing whatever solution would just be lame, mediocre writing. It's off the table.

Modifié par David7204, 09 janvier 2014 - 01:21 .

[The Night Mammoth]

David7204 wrote...

You should have no plan at the start the ME 3.

Introducing the solution in ME 2 would be incredibly mediocre writing, because all the drama goes down the drain before the threat has even arrived. As I've said many times, the question no longer is "How the hell are we going to do this?" It becomes "How the hell is this artifact/technology/whatever going to save us (because we all know that it will.)" And that's boring.

What exactly is gained from introducing a plan at the start of the last game as opposed to teasing or hinting at one in the one before? Not tension, surely, it should've been obvious to every player from the end of ME1 onwards that the Reapers would be defeated by some magic space maguffin. It might be more predictable if we've already got some idea but it's also natural, and avoids any situations involving arses and pulling. 

Modifié par The Night Mammoth, 09 janvier 2014 - 01:24 .

[David7204]

Simple. Anticipation going into the third entry. Anticipation that gets cut to pieces if players know exactly how the Reapers are going to be defeated. The Reapers are no longer unstoppable enemies at all. The premise carries far less weight since we know it's just a matter of getting our solution in order.

[The Night Mammoth]

Dilandau3000 wrote...

Actually, the solution was "introduced" in ME2. Liara mentions the shadow broker was on to some Prothean secret in LotSB, which was obviously foreshadowing her later discovery at the Mars Archives. Arguably, the delays gave her time to find that, though you won't hear me disagree that the payoff for our efforts in ME1 and ME2 should've been handled better.

Yes, 'introduced' with about a dozen asterisks beside it. 

[ImaginaryMatter]

For LotR trilogy the solution to stopping Sauron was presented in the first book (throw the ring into Mount Doom). I don't think people complain about that being mediocre writing. Just because a solution is available doesn't mean it is easy to achieve and instantly empties the story of any tension.

[David7204]

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Not tension, surely, it should've been obvious to every player from the end of ME1 onwards that the Reapers would be defeated by some magic space maguffin.

Wow, you're going to complain about the Crucible and give me this nonsense in the same breath?

Am I the only person on this forum who doesn't just take one look at the Reapers, throw my hands up in the air, and say "Nope, too hard, can't be done, we have no choice but to resort to a magic Reaper-killer artifact/technology!"? I think I might well be.

Modifié par David7204, 09 janvier 2014 - 01:30 .

[David7204]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

For LotR trilogy the solution to stopping Sauron was presented in the first book (throw the ring into Mount Doom). I don't think people complain about that being mediocre writing. Just because a solution is available doesn't mean it is easy to achieve and instantly empties the story of any tension.

It doesn't matter. Different stories derive their drama from different sources and establish different foreshadowing. Mass Effect continually foreshadowed the Reapers as unstoppable and unbeatable. Lord of the Rings never did so. To introduce a solution that subverts that before the Reapers are even introduced cripples the drama of their invasion.

[Steelcan]

you never answered David,

have you heard the story of Robb Stark?

[The Night Mammoth]

David7204 wrote...

The Night Mammoth wrote...

Not tension, surely, it should've been obvious to every player from the end of ME1 onwards that the Reapers would be defeated by some magic space maguffin.

Wow, you're going to complain about the Crucible and give me this nonsense in the same breath?

I'm not complaining about the Crucible as a concept ****wit, I'm saying it was badly implemented. I thought that was obvious but clearly not obvious enough for your tiny brain to process. 

Am I the only person on this forum who doesn't just take one look at the Reapers, throw my hands up in the air, and say "Nope, too hard, can't be done, we have no choice but to resort to a magic Reaper-killer artifact/technology!"? I think I might well be.

It's not about the galaxy having no choice it's about what BioWare were obviously going to write, and it should have been obvious that Shepard would eventually have to piece together a magical anti Reaper death ray and sacrifice herself trying to fire it in a giant explosive-y finale.

[David7204]

Funny, if I went back and looked at posts made before ME 3's release, somehow I seriously they would all basically be in agreement of how the conflict would be solved. Which is of course what would happen if it was 'obvious.'

Tell me, is it 'obvious' what's going to happen in ME 4? Or DA: I? I'm certainly interested in how things will end.

[Dilandau3000]

David7204 wrote...

So when a problem is solved by 'science' and science alone...it's really nothing more than a Deus Ex Machina. One moment a person has no idea how to solve a problem. The next they do.

As a scientist with a Ph.D.: no. That is not how science works, at all.

Modifié par Dilandau3000, 09 janvier 2014 - 01:48 .

[Dilandau3000]

TipsLeFedora wrote...

I didn't say that.

Oops, sorry, I extracted the quote from your post but kept the wrong header. Fixed.

Modifié par Dilandau3000, 09 janvier 2014 - 01:49 .

[Steelcan]

David7204 wrote...

Funny, if I went back and looked at posts made before ME 3's release, somehow I seriously they would all basically be in agreement of how the conflict would be solved. Which is of course what would happen if it was 'obvious.'

Tell me, is it 'obvious' what's going to happen in ME 4? Or DA: I? I'm certainly interested in how things will end.

Do you recognize this guy?

[David7204]

Dilandau3000 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

So when a problem is solved by 'science' and science alone...it's really nothing more than a Deus Ex Machina. One moment a person has no idea how to solve a problem. The next they do.

As a scientist with a Ph.D.: no. That is not how science works, at all.

Oh? And how is that?

[Jeremiah12LGeek]

I noticed something a long time ago that has remained absolutely true over the years.

I have been called stupid many times, by many people, but I have never been called stupid by someone who was actually smarter than me. People who are smarter than me are smart enough to know that calling everyone stupid is... stupid.

It is virtually always the least intelligent people who claim that everyone who disagrees with them is stupid.

[Dilandau3000]

David7204 wrote...

Dilandau3000 wrote...

David7204 wrote...

So when a problem is solved by 'science' and science alone...it's really nothing more than a Deus Ex Machina. One moment a person has no idea how to solve a problem. The next they do.

As a scientist with a Ph.D.: no. That is not how science works, at all.

Oh? And how is that?

Science is a process by which one gathers data, creates a hypothesis based on the data, and then tests it. This process is then repeated, continually refining the hypotheses. Understanding comes slowly and gradually. There is no sudden transition from having "no idea" to having one. Although such "eureka moments" may happen, they are quite rare (and even then I would argue they're still due to a subconscious processing of information and not an actual "sudden "creation of an idea from nothing).

A Deus Ex Machina is something that is pulled out from nowhere at the last moment. In science, nothing is every pulled from nowhere. And a thesis is as much a story of how an idea was arrived at as it is a description of the idea itself.