1765 réponses à ce sujet

[congokong]

Here's a stupid line of dialogue; far from the worst but still stupid. It's right after Shepard's first dream sequence in ME3.

Shepard: "I didn't get what you'd call a good night's rest."
Liara: "There's more to it than that, isn't there? What's really bothering you?"

Seriously?! Earth is in chaos. How would Liara feel if Shepard asked her that after the fall of Thessia?

[txgoldrush]

congokong wrote...

Here's a stupid line of dialogue; far from the worst but still stupid. It's right after Shepard's first dream sequence in ME3.

Shepard: "I didn't get what you'd call a good night's rest."
Liara: "There's more to it than that, isn't there? What's really bothering you?"

Seriously?! Earth is in chaos. How would Liara feel if Shepard asked her that after the fall of Thessia?

Way to take something out of context.

Nevermind Earth in chaos isn't Shepard's answer.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 14 février 2014 - 07:36 .

[txgoldrush]

So basically this thread is....it doesn't fit MY vision of Mass Effect 3, it must be poorly written.

Sorry but really this is poor critique, you critique on the author's vision, not yours, and if you cannot see author's intent, don't criticize. Many of you don't see the writers intent.

Modifié par txgoldrush, 14 février 2014 - 07:56 .

[von uber]

txgoldrush wrote...

congokong wrote...

Here's a stupid line of dialogue; far from the worst but still stupid. It's right after Shepard's first dream sequence in ME3.

Shepard: "I didn't get what you'd call a good night's rest."
Liara: "There's more to it than that, isn't there? What's really bothering you?"

Seriously?! Earth is in chaos. How would Liara feel if Shepard asked her that after the fall of Thessia?

Way to take something out of context.

Nevermind Earth in chaos isn't Shepard's answer.

Isn't that just someone trying to find out why they are upset (I.e. more than just not sleeping well)?
Odd thing to criticise. 

Some people's view of shep is wildly different to mine; I always find that interesting. 

[von uber]

Well yes, I can see that. Doesn't make it bad writing though, just not to someone's personal taste.

[congokong]

txgoldrush wrote...

congokong wrote...

Here's a stupid line of dialogue; far from the worst but still stupid. It's right after Shepard's first dream sequence in ME3.

Shepard: "I didn't get what you'd call a good night's rest."
Liara: "There's more to it than that, isn't there? What's really bothering you?"

Seriously?! Earth is in chaos. How would Liara feel if Shepard asked her that after the fall of Thessia?

Way to take something out of context.

Nevermind Earth in chaos isn't Shepard's answer.

Shepard's answer is indeed that earth his in chaos. Shepard mentions people screaming in the streets below as they left.

Picture Shepard going to Liara after Thessia and asking "What's bothering you?" 

And the point of this thread is to decide what the worst scene is but since people are mentioning little things like "We live in interesting times" from Miranda I'd mention one that I always found to be stupid.

Modifié par congokong, 14 février 2014 - 04:19 .

[CronoDragoon]

txgoldrush wrote...

So basically this thread is....it doesn't fit MY vision of Mass Effect 3, it must be poorly written.

Sorry but really this is poor critique, you critique on the author's vision, not yours, and if you cannot see author's intent, don't criticize. Many of you don't see the writers intent.

The author's intent is visible in the default Shep for ME3: Suicide Mission deaths, unable to convince Wrex to stand down, etc etc. It's basically a playthrough without Paragon/Renegade persuasions, plus a few bad decisions thrown in, and the assumption that Shepard didn't have time to complete all loyalty missions.  ME3 sees Shepard's journey as one of sacrifice, loss, and perserverence. Peace on Rannoch is impossible. Seen in this context, the content and tone of the endings make a LOT of sense.

In other words, it doesn't match the thrust of ME2's morality/persuasion/Suicide Mission paradigm. You could argue it matches ME1's, except it actually has the audacity to follow through with the consequences it promises. Had the series become progressively darker, more full of consequence and loss as it progressed, then players may have entered Priority Earth with a different mindset, expecting imperfect choice and difficult decisions, instead of expecting the previous sacrifices in the game to merely be the tunnel before the light.

To summarize, ME's writers themselves were a bit schizo during the series, so it's not entirely on the players that they didn't know what the experience entailed going on, in particular players importing saves. Yes, they said "victory through sacrifice" was a big theme. They also said ME1 would be about difficult decisions, so you can't take someone's words at face value always.

Modifié par CronoDragoon, 14 février 2014 - 06:24 .

[Skvindt]

WE FIGHT OR WE DIE!!!!!!!!!!

[AresKeith]

txgoldrush wrote...

So basically this thread is....it doesn't fit MY vision of Mass Effect 3, it must be poorly written.

Sorry but really this is poor critique, you critique on the author's vision, not yours, and if you cannot see author's intent, don't criticize. Many of you don't see the writers intent.

How dare people give their opinion!

[ImaginaryMatter]

txgoldrush wrote...

So basically this thread is....it doesn't fit MY vision of Mass Effect 3, it must be poorly written.

Sorry but really this is poor critique, you critique on the author's vision, not yours, and if you cannot see author's intent, don't criticize. Many of you don't see the writers intent.

Interesting how you bring up author's intend. For one, none of really know what the author's were really intending for most of the game except for what is present in the game itself. But more importantly, why does it matter? Author's intent doesn't mean much. I'm sure a bad comedian still intends for his jokes to be funny but that doesn't prevent them from falling flat; intend also doesn't mean anything if it can't be conveyed clearly.

If you notice a few of the scenes brought up in this discussion are recurring criticisms. Now I realize good or bad writing isn't a black and white matter, but maybe, just maybe there's something to that. After all you can't be so thick as to thing you are the sole prophet of truth and the rest of us are blind sheep hooked up to the matrix, right? Maybe our criticism, however, much it disagrees with your own personal, subjective views is equally as valid? That your personal tastes and interpretations have no more value than anyone elses?

Certainly we can be wrong and irrational and all sorts of crazy, but as I said before, a lot of these criticisms are recurring. So maybe just because you like something doesn't mean that it's not nonsensical or something like that. It's okay to disagree and argue but coming out of the gates all rampant, spouting out that people just don't get it, and blurting out non-sequitors like author's vision is a position all ready filled by David, and we don't need another one of those.

[wright1978]

SRX wrote...

WE FIGHT OR WE DIE!!!!!!!!!!

Come on this isn't about strategy or tactics.

[von uber]

What always makes me laugh is the Conrad Werner interaction in the refugee camp. It's stupid but such a rewarding payoff in a way.

[themikefest]

After talking with Kahlee Saunders you walk through the door and see three Cerberus soldiers dragging a student, but for some reason they can't see you.

[ImaginaryMatter]

themikefest wrote...

After talking with Kahlee Saunders you walk through the door and see three Cerberus soldiers dragging a student, but for some reason they can't see you.

I'm glad I'm not the only one. Every time I go through that scene I start shooting at the glass to try and save the kid. What's even weirder is that no one reacts to it, especially when it seems like such an easy rescue.

[von uber]

Not sure if it should be classed as bad writing, but I forgot how looonnnggg the cutscene from going to the executors office to crashing the CSEC car was.
You basically sit there and watch all the fun happen along with multiple failshep moments.

[ImaginaryMatter]

I know the multiplayer tie-in N7: missions are probably not built to stand up to scrutiny, but does anyone else find the Benning one (N7: Cerberus Abductions) really odd. Hackett speculates that a rogue Cerberus cell may be behind the attacks. It just seems that something like that should have massive implications but everyone just sort of forgets about this.

Also, as far as dialogue goes, Hackett states during the debriefing that attacking human civilians isn't Cerberus's MO. Did Hackett not play ME1?

[themikefest]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

I know the multiplayer tie-in N7: missions are probably not built to stand up to scrutiny, but does anyone else find the Benning one (N7: Cerberus Abductions) really odd. Hackett speculates that a rogue Cerberus cell may be behind the attacks. It just seems that something like that should have massive implications but everyone just sort of forgets about this.

Also, as far as dialogue goes, Hackett states during the debriefing that attacking human civilians isn't Cerberus's MO. Did Hackett not play ME1?

 Its obvious he can't smell what he's shoveling

[Iakus]

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Also, as far as dialogue goes, Hackett states during the debriefing that attacking human civilians isn't Cerberus's MO. Did Hackett not play ME1?

Or Grissom Academy.

Or Mars for that matter.

Or did all those scientists have an officer's commission with the Alliance navy?

[ImaginaryMatter]

von uber wrote...

Not sure if it should be classed as bad writing, but I forgot how looonnnggg the cutscene from going to the executors office to crashing the CSEC car was.
You basically sit there and watch all the fun happen along with multiple failshep moments.

I think that counts. A video game scene is made of more than its writing. Mass Effect is not the sort of game that should have long action cutscenes, especially when they are done terribly. The Kai Leng scenes are really uninspired, I might be able to somewhat get behind the idea that Kai Leng is this awesome fighter if the cutscenes didn't have him 'besting' Shepard in the most over the top, goofy manner.

[von uber]

They showed in LotSB they can do car chases; you could have had an interrupt to intervene in the fight with Thane.. lot's they could have done.

[RangerSG]

iakus wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Also, as far as dialogue goes, Hackett states during the debriefing that attacking human civilians isn't Cerberus's MO. Did Hackett not play ME1?

Or Grissom Academy.

Or Mars for that matter.

Or did all those scientists have an officer's commission with the Alliance navy?

Grissom Academy's made up of Alliance & Ex-Alliance officers in the main though. And they weren't trying to kill students until they started shooting at them. So I'll give a pass on that one. 

Mars, most of the scientist killing was done by Eva, as I recall. Sure, under TIM's orders ultimately. But the Cerberus troops were executing Alliance soldiers. It was the robot killing the staff. Hackett might see that as a 'rogue AI.' 

[Invisible Man]

RangerSG wrote...

iakus wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Also, as far as dialogue goes, Hackett states during the debriefing that attacking human civilians isn't Cerberus's MO. Did Hackett not play ME1?

Or Grissom Academy.

Or Mars for that matter.

Or did all those scientists have an officer's commission with the Alliance navy?

Grissom Academy's made up of Alliance & Ex-Alliance officers in the main though. And they weren't trying to kill students until they started shooting at them. So I'll give a pass on that one. 

Mars, most of the scientist killing was done by Eva, as I recall. Sure, under TIM's orders ultimately. But the Cerberus troops were executing Alliance soldiers. It was the robot killing the staff. Hackett might see that as a 'rogue AI.' 

Cerberus troops shot a lot of unarmed/non-combatant civilians during the coup, I seem to recall more than a few being human. though my memory has been fairly finicky lately.

[RangerSG]

Invisible Man wrote...

RangerSG wrote...

iakus wrote...

ImaginaryMatter wrote...

Also, as far as dialogue goes, Hackett states during the debriefing that attacking human civilians isn't Cerberus's MO. Did Hackett not play ME1?

Or Grissom Academy.

Or Mars for that matter.

Or did all those scientists have an officer's commission with the Alliance navy?

Grissom Academy's made up of Alliance & Ex-Alliance officers in the main though. And they weren't trying to kill students until they started shooting at them. So I'll give a pass on that one. 

Mars, most of the scientist killing was done by Eva, as I recall. Sure, under TIM's orders ultimately. But the Cerberus troops were executing Alliance soldiers. It was the robot killing the staff. Hackett might see that as a 'rogue AI.' 

Cerberus troops shot a lot of unarmed/non-combatant civilians during the coup, I seem to recall more than a few being human. though my memory has been fairly finicky lately.

That's very likely after when Hackett says that, though. As you have to deliver the dogtags to the Ambassador pre-coup. Even if Benning doesn't close then (and I think it does). But I'd agree the coup represents a radical change in Cerberus actions, if not philosophy. Even Joker points that out.

Modifié par RangerSG, 15 février 2014 - 02:35 .