93 réponses à ce sujet

[MassivelyEffective0730]

There was perhaps a time where I would have guessed that it was all a role-playing act.

 

But not anymore. I think, seeing some of these people speak, that they actually believe it, when it's convenient. A video game tells them that 'Renegades hate aliens,' and they well and truly do so for the duration of their game. And when they're online.

 

They hold on to this belief tooth and nail. I've managed to press to the truth out of a few, and they admit, gritting their teeth the whole time, it's a video game belief. But they clearly despise doing so. And despise me all the more for prying it out of them. They do everything they can to hold onto it.

 

It's rather unnerving to imagine what they could be convinced into believing and doing if the world around them actually accepted such beliefs, rather than condemning them. Makes it a bit easier to understand how despots are able to cultivate castes of thugs to enforce their power.

 

Perhaps most ironically at all, these people seem to overwhelmingly be the ones the most angry and opposed to the idea of the story or stories in general 'telling' them any moral.

 

I think that's a rather self-inflating and distorting manner of what actually has been said. Of course, said egotistical armchair psychology is your modus operandi.

 

It's hilarious. You really think you have this great, profound ideal and understanding of people. Then again, that's what you get from the guy who can't stand his ideals not being taken seriously. 

[Bob from Accounting]

It really wouldn't take much of an investment in resources. Perhaps two dozen little conversations, showing that as the war goes on, it's actually getting previously-maligned races working together.

 

I have little doubt the developers did imagine such touches, and resources were indeed a concern. As they always are. You can add it to the 'infinite time and money' list.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

I have no problems with pro-human sentiments as long as the people who support them acknowledge them for what they are - attitudes for role-playing because it can be fun to be evil when you're playing a video game.

 

The problem is when people delude themselves into thinking it's actually a real-world ideology and mass genocide and such are morally justified. When people start citing philosophers and economists and such to 'prove' that human supremacy and mass murder and whatnot are actually delightful concepts in the real world. That's no longer okay. It's immensely foolish, immature, and delusional.

 

So because you don't believe in it (and never stand to back up or support your opinion), it must be bad, no matter any kind of supporting logic or argument or reason? That's just a case of you thinking he's god.

[JamesFaith]

What was utterly stupid here to me was that the reapers had indoctrinated Cerberus by making them want to control the reapers. Why on earth would the reapers do this when they could have simply indoctrinated them the same way they indoctrinated Saren: by making them think that submitting to the reapers was the only way to survive. Why would you control someone into thinking that they can control you, especially when they almost succeeded in doing so? BioWare completely messed up the writing when it came to Cerberus and the reapers in ME3. They allowed both factions to share the idiot ball.

 

Because indoctrinated faction seemingly fighting with Reapers by different ways then Alliance and Council would attract many non-indoctrinated people who would fight in Council army otherwise?

 

Make faction proclaiming surrender to Reaper and you will mostly attract useless cowards.

Make faction which offer different solution how to defeat and dominate Reapers and you will attract soldiers and scientists.

 

And what is more useful to Reapers? Less cowards in enemy ranks or less brave soldiers and genius scientists?

[DeinonSlayer]

I have little doubt the developers did imagine such touches, and resources were indeed a concern. As they always are. You can add it to the 'infinite time and money' list.

They had the word budget for EDI to navel-gaze about multiverses, and for a unique conversation with James which only plays if you go talk to him after the end of Menae and before checking the power failure in the AI core. Seems to me it could have been done with the existing budget if superfluous elements were dropped elsewhere.

[Bob from Accounting]

Those conversations aren't any more 'superfluous' than a geth trying to get through a metal detector.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Those conversations aren't any more 'superfluous' than a geth trying to get through a metal detector.

 

No one said the conversations were superfluous David. Superfluous details in the manner Deinon meant =/= what you want it to mean, just so you can attack him over it.

[DeinonSlayer]

Those conversations aren't any more 'superfluous' than a geth trying to get through a metal detector.

It's a disposable gag; a Spinal Tap reference requiring, at most, two lines. "Try again."

How exactly is EDI's multiverse monologue relevant to the plot in any way?

If it's a question of paying voice actors, I'm certain they could have put the script out there and had fans phone it in. Heck, they've got a contest going on right now for fans to get a voiced role in DA:I, where they pay to fly you there and house you for two days. I'd do it for free.

[Bob from Accounting]

First of all, you should consider the fact that such things require more than just a line of voicework.

 

Second of all, you're using a very silly and very wrong idea of 'contributing to the plot.' What does 95% of all squadmate dialogue 'contribute to the plot'?

[MassivelyEffective0730]

First of all, you should consider the fact that such things require more than just a line of voicework.

 

Second of all, you're using a very silly and very wrong idea of 'contributing to the plot.' What does 95% of all squadmate dialogue 'contribute to the plot'?

 

Define how it's very silly and very wrong, oh master of literary knowledge and all that is good and heroic and scientific!

[DeinonSlayer]

First of all, you should consider the fact that such things require more than just a line of voicework.
 
Second of all, you're using a very silly and very wrong idea of 'contributing to the plot.' What does 95% of all squadmate dialogue 'contribute to the plot'?

You were claiming it was a matter of resource limitations. I pointed out where resources were essentially wasted, and you continue to insist it would have been impossible for something like the war room changes to be included.

And you didn't answer my question. How is EDI's irrelevant multiverse musing indispensible?

[Village_Idiot]

I know it's early in the morning but is anyone down for the David drinking game?

 

Ad hominem! *chug*

 

"This is silly!" *chug*

[grey_wind]

Ad hominem! *chug*

 

"This is silly!" *chug*

We'd all be dead of alcohol poisoning by the end of this day.

[Bob from Accounting]

I never said anything along the lines of impossible. But I do acknowledge the developers are justified in drawing the line somewhere.

 

EDI's line wasn't indispensible. Neither are any of your 'ideas.' Neither are moments like James making eggs, or Grunt not letting people into the party, or Ashley talking about getting ice cream with her mother. Neither is about 95% of dialogue. Despite what you may have deluded yourself into thinking, that does not make such content 'worthless.'

[MassivelyEffective0730]

I never said anything along the lines of impossible. But I do acknowledge the developers are justified in drawing the line somewhere.

 

EDI's line wasn't indispensible. Neither are any of your 'ideas.' Neither are moments like James making eggs, or Grunt not letting people into the party, or Ashley talking about getting ice cream with her mother. Neither is about 95% of dialogue. Despite what you may have deluded yourself into thinking, that does not make such content 'worthless.'

 

It's not characterization, and it's not going towards the plot. It is worthless. You've made a strawman of many statements made by the crew (whom no one else referenced until now except you) and claimed a different meaning to what Deinon said. Your claim is false via strawman and personal attack.

[CrutchCricket]

I label it "Ultimate pro-human" as in pro-human to the point of doing whatever it takes to weaken other species to maximise the relative power of humans. Again, it's role-playing not what I would do if I was playing rationally. I hope that you understand that using a role-playing thread to make claims about people's actual opinions is highly dubious to say the least.

 

Except it does nothing of the sort as most of the named alien kills are inconsequential and some, like Shiala are actually counterproductive. Nor do I find your "relative power of humans" reasoning convincing in the least. Finally, please point to where I made any judgement on people's opinions.

 

You want to roleplay a "**** all aliens" playthrough, go ahead. But at least be honest about it.

 

How exactly is EDI's multiverse monologue relevant to the plot in any way?

 

I found it interesting. I think you can make an argument for characterization in that it shows EDI contemplating things now that she's free to do so. Before while being shackled she was restricted from performing certain actions. I also think she was restricted from thinking about certain things as well since the difference between thinking and doing is much less pronounced in an AI. With the shackles removed, her thoughts span out more and more like a free individual. So while you get her asking about the hard questions, you also get lighter musings.

[MassivelyEffective0730]

Except it does nothing of the sort as most of the named alien kills are inconsequential and some, like Shiala are actually counterproductive. Nor do I find your "relative power of humans" reasoning convincing in the least. Finally, please point to where I made any judgement on people's opinions.

 

You want to roleplay a "**** all aliens" playthrough, go ahead. But at least be honest about it.

 

I agree, if I'm interpreting your last few statements correctly: Don't call this thread the 'ultimate pro-human playthrough'. 

 

It's not really pro-human so much as it is anti-alien.

[ImaginaryMatter]

We'd all be dead of alcohol poisoning by the end of this day.

 

Speaking of which, what is David's new iconic word?

 

His brief exile seems to have advanced him enough to realize how much of a joke 'heroism' became.

[Bad King]

Except it does nothing of the sort as most of the named alien kills are inconsequential and some, like Shiala are actually counterproductive. Nor do I find your "relative power of humans" reasoning convincing in the least. Finally, please point to where I made any judgement on people's opinions.

 

You want to roleplay a "**** all aliens" playthrough, go ahead. But at least be honest about it.

 

I don't argue that being pro-human necessarily means wanting to destroy other species, only that weakening and destroying other species removes the competition for humans and so the ultimate, absolute pro-human would want to remove this competition in order to hold more power, which is relative. You point to my thread as if it is some sort of prime example of what "most pro-Cerberus/humanity people on here are saying" which is complete nonsense. It's role-playing, nothing more, nothing less.

 

Your earlier response:

 

Only because most people who label themselves as pro-anything wind up being douchebags to anything seemingly opposed to it. In a rare instance of Bioware actually presenting a balanced view on something, in ME2 Miranda outlines the difference between human advancement and dominance and between the former and plain anti-alien racism. She also says that unfortunately Cerberus draws a lot of undesirables who are just in the latter camp and all it does is tarnish the issue.

It becomes Truth in Television (or video games at least) when you take a look at what most "pro-Ceberus/humanity" people on here are saying. Case in point: the human supremacist playthrough thread

[CrutchCricket]

Speaking of which, what is David's new iconic word?

 

His brief exile seems to have advanced him enough to realize how much of a joke 'heroism' became.

 

I thought "this is stupid/silly" or some synonym variation was his catchphrase.

[CrutchCricket]

 You point to my thread as if it is some sort of prime example of what "most pro-Cerberus/humanity people on here are saying" which is complete nonsense. It's role-playing, nothing more, nothing less.

 

I point to your thread as the very example of the phenomenon I described: that "pro-x" viewpoints more often than not end up being little more than anti-(not)x tirades. I make no differentiation between actual beliefs and roleplayed ones because that is irrelevant. The progression is the same, the outcome is the same.

[Bad King]

I point to your thread as the very example of the phenomenon I described: that "pro-x" viewpoints more often than not end up being little more than anti-(not)x tirades. I make no differentiation between actual beliefs and roleplayed ones because that is irrelevant. The progression is the same, the outcome is the same.

 

But that is a flawed approach as you fail to differentiate between the extreme and moderate ends of the continuum. Does 'pro-alien' to you also mean 'anti-human'?

[Bob from Accounting]

I point to your thread as the very example of the phenomenon I described: that "pro-x" viewpoints more often than not end up being little more than anti-(not)x tirades. I make no differentiation between actual beliefs and roleplayed ones because that is irrelevant. The progression is the same, the outcome is the same.

 

That's just completely silly.

 

Everyone has made an 'evil' decision in video games. I do. I 'roleplay' as evil. That doesn't mean I support in any sense whatsoever aside from fun in a video game.

 

It's completely relevant.

[CrutchCricket]

But that is a flawed approach as you fail to differentiate between the extreme and moderate ends of the continuum. Does 'pro-alien' to you also mean 'anti-human'?

 

There is no difference in scale. The only difference is one of simulation, if you want to look at it that way. When you roleplay you simulate beliefs. Which means you can also simulate mistakes made by those beliefs. The pro-x -> anti-(not)x progression is a mistake of that belief. Whether you actually hold that belief or merely "simulate" it for roleplay, the same thing happens.

 

If it helps, I'm not accusing you of being a human supremacist. I'm merely accusing of roleplaying one.

[CrutchCricket]

That's just completely silly.

 

Everyone has made an 'evil' decision in video games. I do. I 'roleplay' as evil. That doesn't mean I support in any sense whatsoever aside from fun in a video game.

 

It's completely relevant.

 

Once again you miss the point so comically that I would be the idiot if I tried to explain it to you.