129 réponses à ce sujet

[Hydromatic]

Eeeeh, i didn't find either of them that stupid. Also the inquisitor can act however you like him/her to act. It's not a given that he/she has a certain personality..

 

Thought that was obvious..

[Sion1138]

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.

 

Well, as far as I can gather it's more along the lines of realizing the fault in it's programming and stopping the harvest.

 

It says when you arrive at the podium, that it's solution will no longer work, but then if you refuse to act on it's choices it still employs this, now defunct solution.

[Bob from Accounting]

No. It doesn't. This goes far beyond interaction with the Catalyst. People are very so desperate to come up with a solution, any solution to the Reapers, they shill 'ideas' every step of the way. How Shepard can magically stop the Reapers before they arrive, magically stop them with nukes, magically stop them by blowing up relays, magically stop them with EMPs, magically stop them with a super-duper virus, magically stop them by building super Klendagon guns, magically stop them by having the fleets stay far away from the Reapers because then they'll obviously have the advantage and win every battle, magically stop them by having the fleets move in close to the Reapers because then they'll obviously have the advantage and win every battle...

 

And they're just terrible. Terrible ideas.

 

Is this what a 'smart' protagonist looks like to you? Is this 'intelligence'?

[Cainhurst Crow]

Well, as far as I can gather it's more along the lines of realizing the fault in it's programming and stopping the harvest.
 
It says when you arrive at the podium, that it's solution will no longer work, but then if you refuse to act on it's choices it still employs this, now defunct solution.

So they're mad at the computer for doing what computers do and running things into the ground unless told otherwise?

And yeah, no matter how you word it, its pretty much giving the bad guy a talking to and making them clean up the mess before going to their room without supper.

The problem is, you can cite the quarians and geth peace, or EDI and the crew not being in conflict, or any anecdotal fact, and the catalyst can dismiss it all with a simple question.

"And what happens when there's no longer a shepard, to bring peace?"

[Bob from Accounting]

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

 

The explanation was utterly obvious.

[zambingo]

Wouldn't Shepard or Hawke being idiots be on the player?

I know people moan about The Champion not being able to change much or stop what happens in that story, but hey... that's life. Sometimes no matter how good you are doing someone else will come along and ruin your day.

[Sion1138]

No. It doesn't. This goes far beyond interaction with the Catalyst. People are very so desperate to come up with a solution, any solution to the Reapers, they shill 'ideas' every step of the way. How Shepard can magically stop the Reapers before they arrive, magically stop them with nukes, magically stop them by blowing up relays, magically stop them with EMPs, magically stop them with a super-duper virus, magically stop them by building super Klendagon guns, magically stop them by having the fleets stay far away from the Reapers because then they'll obviously have the advantage and win every battle, magically stop them by having the fleets move in close to the Reapers because then they'll obviously have the advantage and win every battle...

 

And they're just terrible. Terrible ideas.

 

Is this what a 'smart' protagonist looks like to you? Is this 'intelligence'?

 

How are any of the things you mentioned worse than the magical way the Reapers were actually stopped in the end?

 

Also, the ending of ME3 isn't the focus of the discussion here.

[Sion1138]

The explanation was utterly obvious.

 

Of course.

[Cainhurst Crow]

The explanation was utterly obvious.

It really wasn't to be honest. There's no reason garrus should be so focused on sidonus that he can't preform as a leader, or legion so concerned about the geth heretics he can't hack a door. If anything some of these peoples side quest should motivate them more to survive, given their vengeance can be their point of motivation, or the prospect of finding out what happened to that thing they wanted looking into should give them some extra incentive to survive this mess.

[Sion1138]

Wouldn't Shepard or Hawke being idiots be on the player?

I know people moan about The Champion not being able to change much or stop what happens in that story, but hey... that's life. Sometimes no matter how good you are doing someone else will come along and ruin your day.

 

Many examples were cited of instances where the character behaved or uttered words which could be qualified as stupid without the player's input.

[Bob from Accounting]

First of all, it is the focus of this discussion, whether you like it or not. Because it's ultimately the root cause or a great contributor to it.

 

Secondly, that's entirely beside the point. Having no options doesn't make you stupid. It just makes you a person with no options. However 'stupid' the Crucible may be, (and I agree, it is stupid,) that's a problem of the narrative, not of Shepard.

[ManchesterUnitedFan1]

Indeed.

 

You'll forgive me, I hope. 

 

Haha there's nothing to forgive, I make grammar errors all the time

[ManchesterUnitedFan1]

Indeed.

 

You'll forgive me, I hope. 

 

Haha there's nothing to forgive, I make grammar errors all the time

[Sion1138]

First of all, it is the focus of this discussion, whether you like it or not. Because it's ultimately the root cause or a great contributor to it.

 

Secondly, that's entirely beside the point. Having no options doesn't make you stupid. It just makes you a person with no options. However 'stupid' the Crucible may be, (and I agree, it is stupid,) that's a problem of the narrative, not of Shepard.

 

It is not the root cause, I hesitated to even bring it up.

 

It is of course one of the notable instances where the narrative forces Shepard to perform in a less than stellar manner, but it is by far not the only one. Shepard is part of the narrative and you can't separate his dialogue from it.

 

This may therefore be not merely a criticism of the protagonists but of the narrative elements impacting on how they are realized.

 

Also, examples exist in Bioware's own works where this was handled better.

[N7recruit]

No. It doesn't. This goes far beyond interaction with the Catalyst. People are very so desperate to come up with a solution, any solution to the Reapers, they shill 'ideas' every step of the way. How Shepard can magically stop the Reapers before they arrive, magically stop them with nukes, magically stop them by blowing up relays, magically stop them with EMPs, magically stop them with a super-duper virus, magically stop them by building super Klendagon guns, magically stop them by having the fleets stay far away from the Reapers because then they'll obviously have the advantage and win every battle, magically stop them by having the fleets move in close to the Reapers because then they'll obviously have the advantage and win every battle...

 

And they're just terrible. Terrible ideas.

 

Is this what a 'smart' protagonist looks like to you? Is this 'intelligence'?

I'm fine with the Crucible, just not with Anderson's suicidal plan that should never have worked. As well as Shep not arguing properly 

 

So how about this. the Reapers are about to take the Citadel. We send a strike team to use the conduit on ilos ala ME1 to gain control of the station while the citadel defence force holds the reapers off. When we fight our way to the master control tower & take control of the station Via Vigals data hack, we signal the fleets to pour through the relay with the Crucible then we shut the relay leading to the Citadel off to cut off Reaper reinforcements. So it's out entire fleet VS the squadron of Reapers that were sent to capture the Citadel. Not only does put us in a more even playing field with a limited number of Reapers that we can actually fight without being destroyed, It makes us look smarter as we actually had a Plan but also the Reapers as they don't have to act like idiots so we can win the game(Not shutting off the beam on earth, Harbinger not blowing up the Normandy ETC)

 

I realise some of my Critiques of Shep are due to the plot or other characters so I'm being a bit unfair but I personally feel that the ones I made are somewhat valid. Thank you for pointing out the distinction 

 

Also sorry for turning this into a ME argument

[L. Han]

Shepard/Hawke being stupid is most likely due to your decisions and interjections. But I won't sit on the against side on this matter, as I also think that they were sub-optimal. 

 

But really though, looking back at my own life, I too make plenty of stupid decisions and I am willing to bet that if you took a look at your own past you'll probably wish there are tons of things you wished you did differently.

[Bob from Accounting]

Yes. It is the root cause. I have absolutely no doubt that if one of these ridiculous ideas led to a 'happy ending,' many of these exact same people would be shilling it as brilliant. Hmm. What a remarkable occurrence that the two characters being called 'idiots' are the two which people felt they didn't really have control over their fates?

 

This is the exact same phenomena as the complaints over 'cutscene incompetence.'

 

There is and continues to be of a great deal of complaining over the Kai Leng fight on Thessia. Countless, countless posts shrieking over Shepard or Liara or the squadmates not shooting or punching or attacking Leng in whatever split second they might have been able to do somethings.

 

But look at a similar scenario. The clone fight at the end of the Citadel DLC. Have I seen a single complaint over Shepard punching the clone instead of just cutting his throat with the omni blade? Or using biotics? Or the squadmates taking a good five to ten seconds to show up and help Shepard in the fight? Or Shepard pulling out his pistol during the melee?

 

No. Not a single complaint. Not one.

 

Where are the shrieks of 'cutscene incompetence'? Where the mass numbers of threads whining over Shepard not immediately taking out the clone?

[zambingo]

Many examples were cited of instances where the character behaved or uttered words which could be qualified as stupid without the player's input.

Oh. The Auto-Dialogue issue. Yeah I can see that point. The Champion is especially plagued with that, to a point a player has to basically pretend something wasn't just said.

[robertthebard]

So looking through here, and not being able to get quotes to work, nor copy pasting, I'm going to have to wing it:

 

So, Player 1 makes a choice on the dialog wheel, and the protagonist is stupid, the video linked would tend to bear this out.  That's pretty weak there, Shepard didn't make the choice, Player 1 did, and also this player did, quite a bit, because it was funny as hell.  Your choices define the character, and if your choices make the character look stupid, it's not on the character.

 

I always did love how the "That's your plan" fans rail to make Shepard look stupid.  My response to that, every single time I see it is simply this:  No, my plan was to start preparing for this 2 years ago, and change, when Sovereign attacked the Citadel.  Your plan was to bury your head in the sand and pretend it didn't exist, and now, you expect me to magically pull your asses out of the fire, and since I can't, you seem shocked that we're now fighting for our lives.

 

Who was stupid?  The Council, the majority of Alliance command, and everyone else that was in the know that buried it, not Shepard.  Sorry you didn't get your magical "I win" button at that initial meeting in ME 3, but whether you like the dialog or not, that's the options you're now down to, and frankly, it's not Shepard's fault they got there.

[Mes]

I didn't think Hawke or Shep were stupid as characters in and of themselves.

I just hope they incorporate believable reasons for the Inquisitor's leadership ability. More than just because Cass doesn't want to make decisions regarding which villages to save versus which keeps to protect.

[robertthebard]

Hey, N7recruit, did you pay much attention on Ilos?  The relay blew up when you went through it, they can't send people through.  So your solution to a plot device you didn't like was to retcon another plot device?

[Bob from Accounting]

It should be overwhelmingly clear that just as the accusations of 'cutscene incompetence' really don't have anywhere near as much to do with characters behaviors in cutscenes as people like to pretend, accusations of characters being supposed 'idiots' really doesn't have anywhere near as much to do with the characters actual ideas, dialogue, and actions as people like to pretend.

[wolfhowwl]

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. 

 

Pfft, intel gathering? That's hard work. Shepard is too busying trying to get laid.

 

Fraternization and sleeping with your immune system impaired tech specialist before a critical mission, now that is professionalism! Bravo, Shepard.

[Sion1138]

So looking through here, and not being able to get quotes to work, nor copy pasting, I'm going to have to wing it:

 

So, Player 1 makes a choice on the dialog wheel, and the protagonist is stupid, the video linked would tend to bear this out.  That's pretty weak there, Shepard didn't make the choice, Player 1 did, and also this player did, quite a bit, because it was funny as hell.  Your choices define the character, and if your choices make the character look stupid, it's not on the character.

 

I always did love how the "That's your plan" fans rail to make Shepard look stupid.  My response to that, every single time I see it is simply this:  No, my plan was to start preparing for this 2 years ago, and change, when Sovereign attacked the Citadel.  Your plan was to bury your head in the sand and pretend it didn't exist, and now, you expect me to magically pull your asses out of the fire, and since I can't, you seem shocked that we're now fighting for our lives.

 

Who was stupid?  The Council, the majority of Alliance command, and everyone else that was in the know that buried it, not Shepard.  Sorry you didn't get your magical "I win" button at that initial meeting in ME 3, but whether you like the dialog or not, that's the options you're now down to, and frankly, it's not Shepard's fault they got there.

 

You almost seem to see this as a personal attack on a personified Commander Shepard. 

 

We are criticizing the dialog options as they were written by whomever. So we're criticizing the writers for putting "We fight of we die." and "...strategy or tactics." in there instead of something along the lines of what you just wrote.

[Bob from Accounting]

Yes, Mass Effect and Shepard do have it's issues and problems. As every story of any significant length and any characters with significant screentime do.

 

However, it boils down to this simple fact:

 

I have absolutely no doubt - absolutely no doubt whatsoever - that even if Shepard came up with an utterly brilliant, scientific plausible and logistically viable idea to defeat the Reapers which nevertheless ended in failure, there would still be masses of people here deriding him as an 'idiot' because he didn't think to use a 'super-duper computer virus.' Or he didn't 'decide to build a bajillion dreadnoughts.'