David7204 wrote...
Lord of the Rings never had the destruction of the ring very heavily built up as an impossible task beforehand. Stories have different foreshadowing and derive their drama from different sources.
You never read the books have you?David7204 wrote...
Lord of the Rings never had the destruction of the ring very heavily built up as an impossible task beforehand. Stories have different foreshadowing and derive their drama from different sources.
Kem wrote...
2)That's exactly what I'm saying.Not once is it implied in the first "30 min of gameplay" that "Earth is more special" then any other planet.Shepard doesn't ask the council for help because Earth is special,he asks for help because it's his home and humanity won't survive on it's own.That's the same reason no one jumps to help him at first.Their #1 priority is to secure their own home's safety.On top of that Shepared presents them (in his own words) with "a lot of unknows" in the form of the Cruciable.How is this so hard to understand?The plot holes that already riddle the trilogy aren't enough you have to creat imaginary ones just to have something to bash?[u][b]
I believe you have openly told me why I am oh-so-wrong in regards to this before, so thanks for making it concise this timedreamgazer wrote...
LOL.
![=]](https://lvlt.forum.bioware.com/public/style_emoticons/default/sideways.png)
Linkenski wrote...
I believe you have openly told me why I am oh-so-wrong in regards to this before, so thanks for making it concise this timedreamgazer wrote...
LOL.
David7204 wrote...
Lord of the Rings never had the destruction of the ring very heavily built up as an impossible task beforehand. Stories have different foreshadowing and derive their drama from different sources.
von uber wrote...
The destruction of the ring is mentioned in the shadow of the past (chapter 3?) Where it is noted that isildur didn't listen to elrond's advice to destroy the ring but claimed it for his own (which frodo ultimately ends up doing too).
For some reason this is all I can think of when I hear that LOTR line.Billie Bones wrote...
David7204 wrote...
Lord of the Rings never had the destruction of the ring very heavily built up as an impossible task beforehand. Stories have different foreshadowing and derive their drama from different sources.
Does the term "One does not simply walk to Mordor" ring a bell?
Modifié par Linkenski, 13 janvier 2014 - 01:34 .
"There are complications" when talking to David.Billie Bones wrote...
David7204 wrote...
Lord of the Rings never had the destruction of the ring very heavily built up as an impossible task beforehand. Stories have different foreshadowing and derive their drama from different sources.
Does the term "One does not simply walk to Mordor" ring a bell?
AresKeith wrote...
von uber wrote...
The destruction of the ring is mentioned in the shadow of the past (chapter 3?) Where it is noted that isildur didn't listen to elrond's advice to destroy the ring but claimed it for his own (which frodo ultimately ends up doing too).
That's why Gollum is the true hero of the story
Guest_mikeucrazy_*
Linkenski wrote...
For some reason this is all I can think of when I hear that LOTR line.Billie Bones wrote...
David7204 wrote...
Lord of the Rings never had the destruction of the ring very heavily built up as an impossible task beforehand. Stories have different foreshadowing and derive their drama from different sources.
Does the term "One does not simply walk to Mordor" ring a bell?
,In case you're not familiar here. Yes, this is the guy who said that.
Sorry for off-topic, just pepping up the mood :-DDDDD
Linkenski wrote...
Kem wrote...
2)That's exactly what I'm saying.Not once is it implied in the first "30 min of gameplay" that "Earth is more special" then any other planet.Shepard doesn't ask the council for help because Earth is special,he asks for help because it's his home and humanity won't survive on it's own.That's the same reason no one jumps to help him at first.Their #1 priority is to secure their own home's safety.On top of that Shepared presents them (in his own words) with "a lot of unknows" in the form of the Cruciable.How is this so hard to understand?The plot holes that already riddle the trilogy aren't enough you have to creat imaginary ones just to have something to bash?
1) Shepard can be Spacer and Colonist and an intro of 10 minutes of not-total-destruction and a lame child is not enough to properly set up the "now-then" scenario Earth needed to showcase why we should care about it in a world where we've grown attached to the actual other planets in the universe from being there in the other two games.
2) IMO it's narrowminded how they keep viewing it as a "war" the entire time, and maybe that's just me (probably) but I the way they chose to portray the Reaper threat in the writing makes it feel like it's WWII and it's alliances vs. alliances rather than survivalists vs. monsters which is still what I think the Reaper threat always was supposed to be and is what it physically looks like in ME3. I just hate how they keep discussing tactics as if they're dealing with a regular foe (there ARE exceptions, IMO this is just a common gripe I have)
3) Aside from the beginning, why are they still not second-guessing their constant focus on Earth when Thessia and Palaven are on the brink of defeat? What kind of strategy is that. I guess we're taling Ruthless Calculus of War in this case, but aside from mentioned (in another context) by Garrus I don't understand why the writing doesn't adress this. The entire plot is riding on an idea that needs justification IMO.
Bingo. It was very clear that it was going to be Gollum who would destroy the ring(not on purpose midn you) and that Frodo would fall to the ring when he had to destroy it. The books and even the movie made it clear as day that once at mount doom it was not oging to be a simple throw the ring in and happy ending.von uber wrote...
AresKeith wrote...
von uber wrote...
The destruction of the ring is mentioned in the shadow of the past (chapter 3?) Where it is noted that isildur didn't listen to elrond's advice to destroy the ring but claimed it for his own (which frodo ultimately ends up doing too).
That's why Gollum is the true hero of the story
Yes, and even this is foreshadowed by gandalf when frodo says it was a pity bilbo didn't kill him.
Modifié par David7204, 13 janvier 2014 - 02:19 .
Good thing you just proved to me you did not pay attention at all.David7204 wrote...
Most stories make it clear the protagonists are facing a difficult challenge. Mass Effect took it far, far further than Lord of the Rings ever did. Two games, dozens of hours building up how powerful they are. It's not on the same level at all.
As a side note, the ending to the Lord of the Rings would be a lot better without Gollum doing his thing.
Linkenski wrote...
1) Shepard can be Spacer and Colonist and an intro of 10 minutes of not-total-destruction and a lame child is not enough to properly set up the "now-then" scenario Earth needed to showcase why we should care about it in a world where we've grown attached to the actual other planets in the universe from being there in the other two games.
Modifié par AlanC9, 13 janvier 2014 - 02:24 .
David7204 wrote...
Most stories make it clear the protagonists are facing a difficult challenge. Mass Effect took it far, far further than Lord of the Rings ever did. Two games, dozens of hours building up how powerful they are. It's not on the same level at all.
As a side note, the ending to the Lord of the Rings would be a lot better without Gollum doing his thing.
Modifié par AresKeith, 13 janvier 2014 - 02:24 .
Modifié par David7204, 13 janvier 2014 - 02:25 .
David7204 wrote...
Yes. What did Gollem struggling for the ring and falling add to the story? What merit does that have?
You don't get the purpose of Gollum do you?
Ce sujet est fermé
Retour en haut