946 réponses à ce sujet

[Steelcan]

Javik's line was better if you have him take it down.

 

"This is beneath me!"

Javik's line are always better

[The Sarendoctrinator]

Javik's line was better if you have him take it down.

 

"This is beneath me!"

I don't have Javik.   Why must you taunt me with a DLC prothean, BioWare? I am forever waiting for the day when a true ultimate edition will be released with him on-disc. 

[Perpetual Nirvana]

What I find ironic about Shepard wanting the Council races to drop everything and head to earth was that Udina's coup had exactly the same endgoal.

[ImaginaryMatter]

What I find ironic about Shepard wanting the Council races to drop everything and head to earth was that Udina's coup had exactly the same endgoal.

 

I found that odd as well. After the coup there's an update about how 'military strategists' deemed that Udina's goals were too risky and would most likely result in such a catastrophic failure that it would cost the entire war effort. But it's okay when Shepard does it.

 

I chalk it up to the unfocused narrative that tried to do to take on too much and left the individual components undeveloped or hardly fleshed out.

[Barquiel]

Udina's coup didn't make much sense. The Council representatives are not the actual leaders of those species. Killing the ambassadors of other countries doesn't mean you suddenly get to run their military...

[Derpy]

IMHO the coup was really just a way of Cerberus to display power and dominance over the alien races as they would have taken control of their capital. Cerberus would then have bragging rights that they "took the Citadel and that humans are more superior". Of course they could use this display of power as a way to get more allies and then take the reapurz down themselves and become the rulers of the galaxy.

[Han Shot First]

What I find ironic about Shepard wanting the Council races to drop everything and head to earth was that Udina's coup had exactly the same endgoal.

 

Having Earth being the focus at all was silly. It was a case of advertising trumping story.

 

Lorewise there is no reason why Earth should be the focus.

[Lhawke]

The look of anguish on N7 renegade Shepards face in lotsb at the hostage part. She'd already killed a hostage in cold blood in a loyalty mission, what was one more.

 

"I thought you might want to join the Normandy"  Er what?   I do not want you back on the Normandy, I was just thought I'd drop by after visiting THANE.

 

Calm and collected dialogue with Garrus when Kaidan was dead. Upset and melodramatic dialogue with Joker on the same subject minutes later.

 

Shepard's flirting with James.

 

Shepard's caring about Thessia.

 

This last one is very trivial but really annoys me. "take what you need and move out". Shepard is giving ME orders now?  I can't pretend it's talking to the team, I mean they must stand there. Oh yes and "let's pick up the pace." I've never played a protagonist I've wanted to hit before.

 

I do like activating objects for comments like the crashed ship on priority palavin type of thing, otherwise I would have preferred Shepard to shut up and let the team do the talking.

[Bob from Accounting]

The less story reactivity to class and background, the better.

 

Just common sense. Every bit of of story content given to class and background is one more bit taken out of the player's hands.

[DeinonSlayer]

The less story reactivity to class and background, the better.
 
Just common sense. Every bit of of story content given to class and background is one more bit taken out of the player's hands.

DAAAA:O.

DAAAA-AAAA-AAAA-AAAA:O

Templars come and-ah burn-ah your home

[wolfhowwl]

But the player gets to choose their background and class at the beginning of the game.

 

What exactly is the problem here?

[Bob from Accounting]

I'll make sure and write a lengthy thread discussing the four five reasons why it's a poor idea when a new ME forum is opened up and some hopefully intelligent posters flood in. Should be in a few months or so.

[ImaginaryMatter]

I'll make sure and write a lengthy thread discussing the four reasons why it's a poor idea when a new ME forum is opened up and some hopefully intelligent posters flood in. Should be in a few months or so.

 

Oh... you're back.

[TheOneTrueBioticGod]

Oh, now you've done it.

Something David this way comes...

Personally, I agree 100%. Like in DA:O, how certain characters react entirely differently to you based on who you are (ex: your reception on first approach to the Dalish camp).

You were right. 

[Bob from Accounting]

But the player gets to choose their background and class at the beginning of the game.

 

What exactly is the problem here?

 

Five problems.

 

1. The player has no reasonable way of knowing what the consequences will be unless explicit foreshadowing is present, which is unlikely. So it's not a meaningful choice.

 

2. The player should not be required to play a class they don't enjoy to get the story they want.

 

3. The player character should not be defined by their class personality wise. This is very likely to happen if the narrative is altered for class. Even small comments will heavily establish characterization.

 

4. The likelihood of content being spread equally is low.

 

5. The use of class abilities canonically will cause problems by collapsing the player's assumption of the player character being narratively classless.

[DeinonSlayer]

Different content specific to different backgrounds improves replay value. Keeps things fresh, and shows you different sides of characters. Jowan comes across as a completely different person if you saw him in the Magi origin, versus first seeing him in a dungeon beneath Redcliffe Castle with any other Warden. Just about everyone in Orzammar reacts differently to a fellow dwarf - word of your actions in the two dwarven origins spreads far and wide; a commoner has strong cause to side with Bhelen while a noble has just the opposite. A Dalish warden gets a warm greeting in the Brecalian forest, while a human is one wrong step from getting their throat slit. I thought it was fascinating how the Hahren's reactions differed based on who you were, from welcoming but frustrated (dalish) to tepidly receptive (city elf) to sharing a hostile sermon when he offers to tell you a story of his people (human). I had a better understanding of why some would be more inclined to side with the werewolves after seeing that in one of my later playthroughs.

It creates a richer world.

DA:O's character creator gave a good idea what each of the backgrounds entailed, and a basic gist of where your character fit in society. You claim it's impossible, David, when it's already been done.

Human Noble: "Gee, I wonder why Shianni had such a problem with me." *Switches to City Elf* "...oh. Oh. Sh**."

[Animositisomina]

Anyone else kinda wish bans from the old site carried over to the new site?

 

Hi, David.

[TheOneTrueBioticGod]

Five problems.

 

1. The player has no reasonable way of knowing what the consequences will be unless explicit foreshadowing is present, which is unlikely. So it's not a meaningful choice.

 

2. The player should not be required to play a class they don't enjoy to get the story they want.

 

3. The player character should not be defined by their class personality wise. This is very likely to happen if the narrative is altered for class. Even small comments will heavily establish characterization.

 

4. The likelihood of content being spread equally is low.

 

5. The use of class abilities canonically will cause problems by collapsing the player's assumption of Shepard being narratively classless.

1. The player can have a reasonable way of knowing. For example, for engineer they could do something like "... Engineers are often able to solve technical and mechanical problems in situations where others can't."

2. Yeah... having this wouldn't effect the story. In Omega, all it affected was whether some nameless civilians died. It allowed a player to not risk Aria and Nyreen without killing thousands of civilians. The overall plot wasn't changed. 

3. Having interrupts doesn't have to change the dialogue. And if it did, as long as we get back the amount of options on the tree in ME, then it makes no difference really. 

4. Admittedly, the Soldier class could be excluded a bit. But all the others wouldn't. 

5. Since when did anyone have an assumption of Shepard being narratively classless? What? Technically, the default Shepard is soldier. But you can't say Shepard is narratively a soldier, can you? That's just silly. 

[Bob from Accounting]

1. The player needs to know how exactly that will come into a play. Will a character be saved by it? Will a certain mission have a third option on a mission because of it? What do they miss out on for not having biotics? Since the player knows none of these things, it doesn't apply.

 

2. That's right. It didn't. That's exactly how we want to keep things.

 

3. It makes a great deal of difference.

 

4. I doubt that. Engineers, infiltrators, and adepts would probably be easier, but vanguards, sentinels, and soldiers would be tougher.

 

5. We can and we do. Shepard doesn't use any class abilities in cutscenes, despite how much they might make sense. This is necessary since such cutscenes would be pretty much impossible.

[TheOneTrueBioticGod]

1. The player needs to know how exactly that will come into a play. Will a character be saved by it? Will a certain mission have a third option on a mission because of it? What do they miss out on for not having biotics? Since the player knows none of these things, it doesn't apply.

 

2. That's right. It didn't. That's exactly how we want to keep things.

 

3. It makes a great deal of difference.

 

4. I doubt that. Engineers, infiltrators, and adepts would probably be easier, but vanguards, sentinels, and soldiers would be tougher.

 

5. We can and we do. Shepard doesn't use any class abilities in cutscenes, despite how much they might make sense. This is necessary since such cutscenes would be pretty much impossible.

1. The player doesn't need to know. We didn't know if saving the council would make us lose or if destroying the base would make it harder in ME3. 

2. It can be smaller things, like the Omega incident. No reason for big, story arc changing events. I don't think there's anything wrong with changing up the smaller things based on class. Shepard could save Victus on Palaven.

3. It doesn't have to. 

4. Sentinels and Soldiers yes, but Vanguards would be easy. Like Eva on Mars and Kai Leng on Thessia, or Kai Lang on the Citadel. Biotic charge while they're escaping. 

5. Shepard used the class ability on Omega. Your point is null. 

[Bob from Accounting]

1. Yes, they do.

 

2. You could have convinced me if it weren't for the last sentence. It's precisely this sort of thing that needs to be avoided.

 

3. That's right, it doesn't have to. That's exactly why I'm advocating this. The developers don't have to and shouldn't do it.

 

4. No. Look at all the problems this causes. A massive amount of rewriting because of Leng possibly being dead on the Citadel.

 

5. No. Shepard used an omni tool on Omega. Something all classes have access to.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

Better than watching AutoShep eat up a third-grade propaganda slideshow with a spoon.

 

I simply destroy Patrick Weekes' art and shoot Legion.

[themikefest]

 

5. No. Shepard used an omni tool on Omega. Something all classes have access to.

If they all have omni tools, why didn't all classes have that same interrupt that an engineer gets?

[DeinonSlayer]

1. Why? What's the fun of a narrative where you can see everything coming from ten miles away?

2. Why? Other situations would come up (like Omega) where instead of an Adept or Vanguard, the Engineer would get their time to shine. DA:O had quests that only a rogue could complete.

3. I agree developers don't have to, but you'll have to explain why they shouldn't do it, especially given that it's already been done, and done well. I notice you tend to duck the example of DA:O whenever it's invoked.

4. Who says he needs to be dead? A humiliating kick in the ass is better than nothing. Even if he is dead, big loss - he was hardly a compelling character. You could kill Vulpes Inculta (who did a much better job of being a menace) or even Caesar in New Vegas and the narrative recovered just fine. Someone else could take his place.

5. Shepard used knowledge unique to the engineer on Omega, not simply an omni-tool.

[TheOneTrueBioticGod]

1. Yes, they do.

 

2. You could have convinced me if it weren't for the last sentence. It's precisely this sort of thing that needs to be avoided.

 

3. That's right, it doesn't have to. That's exactly why I'm advocating this. The developers don't have to and shouldn't do it.

 

4. No. Look at all the problems this causes. A massive amount of rewriting because of Leng possibly being dead on the Citadel.

 

5. No. Shepard used an omni tool on Omega. Something all classes have access to.

1. Why?

2. Admittedly, it would probably take a lot of effort to stop someone else's free fall with a pull. You got a point there.

3. They may have to change the dialogue after one of the interrupts, but if they have time for ****** Diana Allers, they can do that. 

4. It would make it a better RPG, and would eliminate the plot hole. Why wouldn't Shepard charge at him? It would change things, but if they can build the next one around these possibilities if they have the time. Even so, it could still be in moderation. The Omega event was more or less perfectly done, they could just stick to something like that. 

5. So? The cutscene was different. It doesn't matter if a omni-tool, she used the skill from being an engineer.