129 réponses à ce sujet

[ManchesterUnitedFan1]

Indeed. As in "its" and "it's"

 

Thanks again.

Off Topic, but actually, 'its' is an exception.

 

While an apostrophe followed by an 'S' is usually short for 'x is' or 'belonging to x', in the case of 'it's' it can only be short for 'it is'; the correct form for a meaning of 'belonging to it' would be 'its'.

[Sion1138]

They could do this by making use of their attributes. Shadowrun Returns allows players to engage missions with intelligence dialogue options.

 

As did KotOR for example. 

 

Mute protagonist though.

[Captain Nimbaud]

The PC is essentially a blank slate that players have to fill in throughout the game, define them too much and some would argue it takes away a little of the roleplaying element. By their very nature Bioware's main characters have to be written in a fairly broad manner thus you might see them as being "stupid" but I rather prefer it, even if my character at times may sound like a child on a school trip asking obvious questions to a teacher.

[IC-07]

ME series and DA are basically fairytails, so stupidity pulls off just fine.

[In Exile]

They could do this by making use of their attributes. Shadowrun Returns allows players to engage missions with intelligence dialogue options.

 

It doesn't need to be gated - it can just be a dialogue option. The issue is just about making the PC the active force driving the scene instead of an order taker. DA:O/DA2 and ME1-3 are all about being an order taker; even with the munity in ME1, it's basically Anderson's doing. 

[Sion1138]

Off Topic, but actually, 'its' is an exception.

 

While an apostrophe followed by an 'S' is usually short for 'x is' or 'belonging to x', in the case of 'it's' it can only be short for 'it is'; the correct form for a meaning of 'belonging to it' would be 'its'.

 

Indeed.

 

You'll forgive me, I hope. 

[Bob from Accounting]

Was it Sheps achievement's that made him or her stand out from the bunch for you?

Like they do achieve some pretty nifty things I'm not denying that but to me it just seemed like Dumb Luck rather than their skill. 

 

"Shepard is awesome because the plot says so"

 

The complete Lack of any sort of Competent Planning (Suicide mission+ Earth) , research on the enemy(Collectors + Reapers), Military Strategy, Convincing leadership skills(I find their Speeches rigid) &  overall stupid dialogue that frustrates me to no end. 

 

These are pretty pathetic reasons for a character being supposedly 'an idiot.'

 

#1. Can you think of any protagonist in any fiction that 'conducts research' on the enemy? Any protagonist in any fiction at all?

 

#2. Aside from a few, hiccups, like there are for any and every character, Shepard's dialogue is not stupid overall in the slightest.

 

#3. The speeches are and leadership skills are bad because they're 'rigid.' How is that, exactly?
 

[Sion1138]

The PC is essentially a blank slate that players have to fill in throughout the game, define them too much and some would argue it takes away a little of the roleplaying element. By their very nature Bioware's main characters have to be written in a fairly broad manner thus you might see them as being "stupid" but I rather prefer it, even if my character at times may sound like a child on a school trip asking obvious questions to a teacher.

 

Actually, that was one of my gripes with the Mass Effect games. I felt that the writers/developers took too much liberty with the protagonist, as in Shepard's obsession with the "Boy back on Earth": 

 

On one occasion I chose an option labeled as "I can relate." and my character responded with "There was a boy back on Earth...".

 

There were many such instances.

[Cainhurst Crow]

yes. paragade shepard is a smartass in me1.

 

and also she is still a professional. and a soldier.

 

Always the professional.

 

[Steppenwolf]

Wait, wait ... you got half your crew killed, and other people are stupid for choosing the Paragon/Renegade options?

Your crew's survival being based almost entirely on whether or not you ran their errands is pretty stupid. Any commander who's trying to save as many lives as possible would obviously forego such moronic excursions. The entire "suicide mission" nonsense was just a hamfisted way to justify the running of those errands.

Shepard is one of the strongest protagonists ever, actually.

Falling apart after 1 child he didn't even know dies...

[Han Shot First]

Falling apart after 1 child he didn't even know dies...

 

PTSD doesn't work the way you think it does.

[Cainhurst Crow]

Falling apart after 1 child he didn't even know dies...

 

Not to be rude but I never saw anything of shepard "falling apart" from seeing the child die. They didn't become depressed, they didn't freeze up in combat, they didn't start balling for no reason, they didn't have weird mood swings unless either provoked or player decisions.

I don't see what qualifies falling apart if they still function on par and preform above and beyond what is needed at times.

[Bob from Accounting]

Having spent significant time on the Mass Effect forums, it seems that most players on the BSN proclaiming Shepard is an idiot are upset for really two reasons.

 

Mostly, because people are convinced it would be good writing for Shepard to come up with a magical solution to the Reapers (build a super-duper fleet, super-duper weapon, use a super-duper tactic.) Basically, forum members upset with the Crucible and Catalyst (which is fine, so am I) convinced that the have the answers to everyone's problems and demand Shepard is 'stupid' for not implementing them. . Needless to say, these 'solutions' (often shilled as brilliant science by forum posters) are not only generally ridiculous on a technical level, but worse, completely garbage writing.

 

You know, on second thought, it's really less people being 'convinced' and more just desperation. People flinging out ideas in desperation of having something, anything, other than the endings. These ideas just aren't good enough to stand on their own, so they have to be shilled.

 

Aside from that, it really seems to be frustration over people not liking the autodialogue response. Which is fine. However, it's less fine to pretend that Shepard not acting like your ideal imaged character is 'stupid' instead of just out of character.

[Captain Nimbaud]

Actually, that was one of my gripes with the Mass Effect games. I felt that the writers/developers took too much liberty with the protagonist, as in Shepard's obsession with the "Boy back on Earth": 

 

On one occasion I chose an option labeled as "I can relate." and my character responded with "There was a boy back on Earth...".

 

There were many such instances.

Well that's what I'm saying, I'd rather have my character less defined by the devs and have a more blank slate approach and sound a little silly at times than have my character more defined but out of my control.

[thats1evildude]

Your crew's survival being based almost entirely on whether or not you ran their errands is pretty stupid. Any commander who's trying to save as many lives as possible would obviously forego such moronic excursions. The entire "suicide mission" nonsense was just a hamfisted way to justify the running of those errands.

 

Not from my perspective. Dragon Age Origins was the very first Bioware game I ever played, and when my companions came up to my Warden asking for my assistance with side quests, my altruistic Warden who was genuinely invested in saving as many innocent lives as possible completed them on the basis of two reasons:

 

1) Party members who are not dealing with outstanding personal baggage have better morale and will perform better on the field of battle.

2) Party members who are more loyal to the Warden will fight harder on their behalf and are less likely to question orders.

 

Troops who respect their commander are going to out-perform troops who have little to no faith in their leader whatsoever. That's just basic logic, and I don't see why my line of thought can't be extended to the personal missions of Mass Effect 2.

[Bob from Accounting]

Your crew's survival being based almost entirely on whether or not you ran their errands is pretty stupid. Any commander who's trying to save as many lives as possible would obviously forego such moronic excursions. The entire "suicide mission" nonsense was just a hamfisted way to justify the running of those errands.

 

Utterly ridiculous.

 

Are you honest enough to admit that this places just about every sidequest in existence as a 'moronic excursion' and thus just about every RPG character in existence a moron? Or does this pathetic and childish comment only extend to games which are convienant for you to criticize right at the moment?

[Sion1138]

Having spent significant time on the Mass Effect forums, it seems that most players on the BSN proclaiming Shepard is an idiot are upset for really two reasons.

 

Mostly, because people are convinced it would be good writing for Shepard to come up with a magical solution to the Reapers (build a super-duper fleet, super-duper weapon, use a super-duper tactic.) Basically, forum members upset with the Crucible and Catalyst (which is fine, so am I) convinced that the have the answers to everyone's problems and demand Shepard is 'stupid' for not implementing them. . Needless to say, these 'solutions' (often shilled as brilliant science by forum posters) are not only generally ridiculous on a technical level, but worse, completely garbage writing.

 

You know, on second thought, it's really less people being 'convinced' and more just desperation. People flinging out ideas in desperation of having something, anything, other than the endings. These ideas just aren't good enough to stand on their own, so they have to be shilled.

 

Aside from that, it really seems to be frustration over people not liking the autodialogue response. Which is fine. However, it's less fine to pretend that Shepard not acting like your ideal imaged character is 'stupid' instead of just out of character.

 

The Crucible/Catalyst problem stems more from the fact that people felt they had concrete arguments, acquired in-game, that would disprove or perhaps serve to convince the Catalyst to stop what it's doing, but they are not allowed to use these arguments.

 

They can simply agree and choose one of the options, or disagree and die.

[Cainhurst Crow]

The Crucible/Catalyst problem stems more from the fact that people felt they had concrete arguments, acquired in-game, that would disprove or perhaps serve to convince the Catalyst to stop what it's doing, but they are not allowed to use these arguments.

 

They can simply agree and choose one of the options, or disagree and die.

 

so basically, they're sad that they can't pick a "And then the badguy learned a lesson and fixed all the problems of the world" ending?

 

Forgive me if I withhold my enthusiasm.

[Sion1138]

Utterly ridiculous.

 

Are you honest enough to admit that this places just about every sidequest in existence as a 'moronic excursion' and thus just about every RPG character in existence a moron? Or does this pathetic and childish comment only extend to games which are convienant for you to criticize right at the moment?

 

Side-quests are fine.

 

However, a character's survival in a later mission depending on a side-quest, with no explanation as to the whyness, is not.

 

For example, if you don't do the side-quest, character X is shot and dies.

 

If you do not do the side-quest, character X is shot but survives. 

[In Exile]

Mostly, because people are convinced it would be good writing for Shepard to come up with a magical solution to the Reapers (build a super-duper fleet, super-duper weapon, use a super-duper tactic.) 

 

Pretty sure it's saying stuff like "We fight or we die". Shepard's brilliant plan of attack is apparently "go fire bullets at reapers or something".

[N7recruit]

These are pretty pathetic reasons for a character being supposedly 'an idiot.'

 

#1. Can you think of any protagonist in any fiction that 'conducts research' on the enemy? Any protagonist in any fiction at all?

 

#2. Aside from a few, hiccups, like there are for any and every character, Shepard's dialogue is not stupid overall in the slightest.

 

#3. The speeches are and leadership skills are bad because they're 'rigid.' How is that, exactly?
 

It's more a Criticism on the Plot of ME2 where you spend the whole game Gathering a team of 12 people that you don't know you'll even need as you have to go through a Relay that no one has ever come back from ever & you don't know what is on the other side of it. Could be a Reaper or Some other Orbital defence that could blow your ship in to pieces before you even reach the base. Kind seems like a good idea to find out some more info about your enemy before you potentially commit suicide due to lack of intel. 

 

As for Shepard's dialogue, "You can mate with your own Species?"

"this isn't about strategy of tactics, this is about survival"

"We fight or we die!"

"the Citadel? the fights here!"

"I'm only slow cause I'm not running!"

There are others but these are the Ones of the top of my head. + How Shepard forgets how to argue or converse like a normal human being in the Star Kid conversation as well as becoming all fatalistic rather than just arguing.

 

As for Sheps speeches? Never did anything for me, no real flow to them as you can mix Paragon & Renegade sections of them together. Didn't find them motivational, found some of the dialogue rather Cheesy although this is personal taste so it might be an unfair criticism. 

[Cainhurst Crow]

Pretty sure it's saying stuff like "We fight or we die". Shepard's brilliant plan of attack is apparently "go fire bullets at reapers or something".

Well of course, like shepard said this isn't the time for strategy, nor tactics.