476 réponses à ce sujet

[Hello!I'mTheDoctor]

Because making games is their job, and if they do a half-assed job, they should be accountable for it instead of having their consumers come up with stupid in-game justifications to cover their ass. If an actor acts badly, I don't "position myself in the universe" and try to justify his wooden acting as part of his character's personality. A bad actor, bad director or bad producer will get criticized for not doing a good movie and therefore a good job. Why in the hell should game developers be treated any differently?

 

They shouldn't be treated any different, but also look at reviews and then apply the vicarious positioning. Most of them call out places where the characters themselves are treated as real, rational beings and criticized as such, even in films that get tremendous receipt from critics and audiences. And yes, people will rationalize parts of the story away because it makes sense too. In fact, many people do this. And if an actor is portraying a character with 'wooden acting', you ought to look at it and see if its in the characterization for said character. It's rather easy to tell when a character's problems are the result of in-universe portrayal, or bad acting out-of-universe.

 

Let's flip it around then: what have they done to deserve praise?

 

A great deal many things: They've created a video game experience that is largely highly interactive and immersive to a player on a personal level. They've done it consistently, and they've done it consistently well. Mass Effect 3 has it's moments of shining, and they do know how to make a characters be compelling. The ending was done well in one way of making answers unclear and the options something to pause and consider. That alone deserves praise in my opinion.

 

I'm not angry at BioWare for not doing what I wanted them to, I'm angry because they didn't do what THEY said they were going to do. It's all the lies, the deceitful marketing talk from Casey and Super MAC, their complete absence of integrity and the extremely nonchalant manner in which they responded to the ending controversy. BioWare doesn't respect its products, its staff or its consumers. So tell me, why should I respect BioWare?

 

 

They never promised to have a decent ship design you know. This argument really wasn't about the observed flaws with deceptive marketing and over-hype by BW. I don't really know what to say about integrity, since they never really broke it (for better or worse). And yes, they did have a problem with communicating with fans in the aftermath of the game, with other representatives of BW coming out and talking in the place of two people who didn't make statement's about their stated intentions or goals with the ending (and as far as I know, their continued avoidance to do so.) Maybe they think themselves better, maybe they have no explanation themselves, maybe the answer is something much more mundane. But going back to this whole issue that we've been discussing, what does BW's PR problems have to do with poor ship design and not blaming in-universe problems on in-universe people? I thought this argument was about ship design and character culpability, not respect for BW (hint: it wasn't.)

 

I believe I said this earlier, but a story (and by extension, its characters) are only as smart as its writers.

 

That may be true; and it does sound like an admittance or a concession to my point. Yes, the writers didn't do their job. They weren't very smart with their redesign. That translates in-universe to the characters, the engineers, who themselves didn't do their job of being smart with the design. I'm glad we finally came to this understanding.

 

[Arcian]

That may be true; and it does sound like an admittance or a concession to my point. Yes, the writers didn't do their job. They weren't very smart with their redesign. That translates in-universe to the characters, the engineers, who themselves didn't do their job of being smart with the design. I'm glad we finally came to this understanding.

It is not a concession. What that means is that the writers intelligence isn't up to par. The characters intelligence isn't up to par. Neither are anywhere close to acceptable, because an unintelligent story that presents itself as intelligent insults the intelligence of its viewers. Sure, they didn't specifically promise any specific ship designs, but as a fan of science fiction, I reserve the goddamn right to expect them to live up to the science part of that label if they're intent on using it. Especially when the marketing for ME1 has them state that adherence to realism and scientific principles were a big priority for them so as to avoid making another Star Wars game with the serial numbers filed off. That means logic, and not the Rule of Cool, should dictate the design and function of hypothetical technology. THAT is science fiction.

 

All that changed when Super MAC took over the wheel. Mass Effect became Fantasy Fiction instead of Science Fiction, but still labeled itself as the latter.

[AlanC9]

What are the problems we're talking about, anyway? Surely the War Room is the equivalent of a TFCC, added because SR-2 was being refitted as a flagship. The gate guards are there because of console memory limitations requiring a disguised loadscreen if the War Room wasn't to be its own deck. And the armory is back where ME1 had it, so it's a bit silly to blame Mac in particular for that.

[AlanC9]

Especially when the marketing for ME1 has them state that adherence to realism and scientific principles were a big priority for them so as to avoid making another Star Wars game with the serial numbers filed off. That means logic, and not the Rule of Cool, should dictate the design and function of hypothetical technology. THAT is science fiction.

All that changed when Super MAC took over the wheel. Mass Effect became Fantasy Fiction instead of Science Fiction, but still labeled itself as the latter.

Funny. I thought all that changed before they released ME1.

[Arcian]

What are the problems we're talking about, anyway? Surely the War Room is the equivalent of a TFCC, added because SR-2 was being refitted as a flagship. The gate guards are there because of console memory limitations requiring a disguised loadscreen if the War Room wasn't to be its own deck. And the armory is back where ME1 had it, so it's a bit silly to blame Mac in particular for that.

Using a stealth frigate, one that's supposed to be flying far beyond the frontlines, as a flagship seems a bit counterproductive to me. Wouldn't a better protected, better armed dreadnought be better suited for that purpose? As for the gate guards, yes, I am aware it was a disguised loadscreen, but I believe it could have been done better. As for the armory moving up and down, I suppose BioWare's in-game rationale for that is that a stealth vessel like the Normandy isn't expected to be boarded under most circumstances, and that it is somehow more effective for the ground teams to have all their gear close to the drop off exit.

 

The meta rationale is probably that the SR1 had no room for an armory anywhere else. And in ME2, during the Collector attack their point of entry is the Hangar bay, meaning if the armory had been there, the crew would have had no chance to arm themselves. This, of couse, being one of the security flaws I was talking about. In ME3, with no scenes involving enemies boarding the Normandy, they could move the armory back down to the hangar and cite the Alliance's design standards or whatever.

 

Personally, while I dislike the Normandy's interior layout in ME3, I can live with it. What annoys the sh!t out of me though is when people like Hello!I'mTheDoctor goes full apologist mode and starts blaming the characters in the game for BioWare's designs being sh!tty. All this unmeta "i'm-in-the-universe-" BS thinking is just a convoluted way for apologists to criticize BioWare for the mistakes they've made without having to actually criticize BioWare for the mistakes they've made. If invertebrate apologists don't want to make a big deal about their grievances and hurt BioWare's precious, delicate feelings, then I suggest they can it and leave the complaining for us organisms who evolved a spine.

[KaiserShep]

I always thought the layout of the Normandy throughout the entire series was kind of weird. I never really thought it was worth much thought. That the argument about it lasted this long kind of baffles me. Here's to hoping the next ship we get comes closer to meeting our standards. I can't wait for the new game to come out. There will no doubt be a sh*t-ton of other things for the forum to focus on.

[Arcian]

I always thought the layout of the Normandy throughout the entire series was kind of weird. I never really thought it was worth much thought. That the argument about it lasted this long kind of baffles me.

To be perfectly honest, the argument was never really about the design but whether BioWare was to blame for it or not. Like I said in the post above yours, I can live with the design.

 

 

Here's to hoping the next ship we get comes closer to meeting our standards. I can't wait for the new game to come out. There will no doubt be a sh*t-ton of other things for the forum to focus on.

I agree. Not-Mass-Effect-4 has the opportunity to fix a lot of BioWare's past mistakes, and I hope they take the criticism to heart and try to give us the best game they can.

 

And in an attempt to get back on topic, I hope that includes keeping the game 100% Cerberus free.

[Wulfram]

Using a stealth frigate, one that's supposed to be flying far beyond the frontlines, as a flagship seems a bit counterproductive to me. Wouldn't a better protected, better armed dreadnought be better suited for that purpose?

 

Wikipedia says

 

In the 20th century, ships became large enough that most types could accommodate a commander and staff, and during World War II admirals would often prefer a faster ship over the largest one. Some larger ships may have a separate flag bridge for use by the admiral and his staff while the captain commanded from the main navigation bridge. Because its primary function is to coordinate a fleet, a flagship is not necessarily more heavily armed or fortified than other ships.

 

(Wikipedia could be talking nonsense, since it doesn't cite any sources.  But it makes sense to me)

 

Though a stealth frigate does seem like a bit of a waste, unless he was going to be commanding a formation of stealth ships.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

In-universe, that leads me to a conclusion that everyone in the alliance (and apparently all the non-Salarian forces) are morons. There's a reason I tend to stick with Cerberus and the Salarians. Granted, they never explain how the hell all the other aliens and pirates and miscellaneous forces get into position. Or why they waste their time attacking the Reaper when they very easily could have moved past it en masse to get to the beam. Without the big-ass Reaper protecting it noticing.

 

The reason why they couldn't is because it is a video game, not a story. The reaper's presence blocking the path and going in along the "heaviest resistance" is videogamey. It doesn't have to make any sense. Novels have to make more sense. This is why if a person has an IQ higher than 90 they are disqualified from being in the command structure of the Alliance Military. Heck our hero even thought that Asari needed other species to reproduce.

[von uber]

The Normandy design was wrong (too small) in ME1:

 

[Arcian]

The Normandy design was wrong (too small) in ME1:

 

Yeah, it was significantly larger on the inside than the outside.

[AlanC9]

Using a stealth frigate, one that's supposed to be flying far beyond the frontlines, as a flagship seems a bit counterproductive to me. Wouldn't a better protected, better armed dreadnought be better suited for that purpose?

Not being targeted in the first place is a highly effective form of protection, and it's not quite clear to me what being armed has to do with a flagship's function.

[Hello!I'mTheDoctor]

 

Wikipedia says

 

In the 20th century, ships became large enough that most types could accommodate a commander and staff, and during World War II admirals would often prefer a faster ship over the largest one. Some larger ships may have a separate flag bridge for use by the admiral and his staff while the captain commanded from the main navigation bridge. Because its primary function is to coordinate a fleet, a flagship is not necessarily more heavily armed or fortified than other ships.

 

(Wikipedia could be talking nonsense, since it doesn't cite any sources.  But it makes sense to me)

 

Though a stealth frigate does seem like a bit of a waste, unless he was going to be commanding a formation of stealth ships.

 

This is not standard practice for modern naval vessels these days, with flag officers often working from specified command vessels or shore installations. The issue was also that many flag officers also did not do this; it was more of the exception rather than the rule.

 

As I've stated, the war room is redundant, especially considering that the bridge on the Normandy is already equipped with a cockpit and a CIC. There was no point to the war room beyond wanting to add something that seemed different.

[KaiserShep]

The Normandy design was wrong (too small) in ME1:

 

 

The sense of scale of the vehicles of Mass Effect never really was its strong suit. Just have Shepard walk by a Mako tank, a skycar or the Hammerhead and imagine how cramped such a vehicle would be to fit three to four people. Heck, if you look at the contour of the ship from the inside of the bridge, you will notice that the forward airlock extends too far out, and the distance between the bridge and the CIC is about the same as that between the elevator and the cargo bay doors. OMG it's a fever dream in space. IT is real! Cats and dogs will live together. Mass hysteria!

[ImaginaryMatter]

The sense of scale of the vehicles of Mass Effect never really was its strong suit. Just have Shepard walk by a Mako tank, a skycar or the Hammerhead and imagine how cramped such a vehicle would be to fit three to four people. Heck, if you look at the contour of the ship from the inside of the bridge, you will notice that the forward airlock extends too far out, and the distance between the bridge and the CIC is about the same as that between the elevator and the cargo bay doors. OMG it's a fever dream in space. IT is real! Cats and dogs will live together. Mass hysteria!

 

I always liked the disparity between the in-game maps of the Normandy and the layout of the actual ship.

[KaiserShep]

I don't really give it much thought. My preference leans toward having the inside and outside of a vehicle be in line with one another, but I don't let it break the effect for me.

[Arcian]

I always liked the disparity between the in-game maps of the Normandy and the layout of the actual ship.

What's there to like about it, if you pardon me for asking?

[KaiserShep]

Only benefits I can think of is the time it would take to move about the ship and how long it may take to load each deck when moving between them, but I can't say that I care for either of these things.

[ImaginaryMatter]

What's there to like about it, if you pardon me for asking?

 

Oh, I'm just being facetious.

[daecath]

No, that would be the writers who wrote the ending.

[Arcian]

No, that would be the writers who wrote the ending.

Well, to be entirely fair, I wanted to name the topic "Super MAC is the worst thing to happen to the entire franchise", but that would have gotten locked up in about 5 minutes because it is "inflammatory against the developers".

[Fixers0]

In all honesty, outside of technical limitations and that kind of stuff I would say that the majority of errors regarding scale and lore are the product of the writers' limited comprehension of their fiction, not to mentions real life factors such as science, engineering and tactics. It would not be unreasonable to suggest that the fanbase in certain instances have a better understanding of the world than the writers do. The writers are primarly concerned with the content of the narrative, they do not necessarily concern themselfs with the context, this is especially true for Mass Effect, where most of the writing errors are found within the context.

[thehomeworld]

It's not THE worst but them being included like they were was a pretty bad idea it got worst with the introduction of space ninja boy but belive it or not BW made even worst choices like allowing us to give everyone over to the reapers via sythisis and let them win or outright control them which in itself is a load of crap and a new can of worms at the same time. I think we should've been able to either pick which side we wanted to be on in ME2, have it be a lie and we were in a reaper ship for most of the game thinking we where working for Cerberus, or do what others have suggested we sideline both groups for working with Liara who brings you back to life and with her being the SB we take out the threat as Me2 was a very irrelivent game in the series so much so they wrote out nearly 97% of the game itself by 3.

[Farangbaa]

It's not THE worst but them being included like they were was a pretty bad idea it got worst with the introduction of space ninja boy but belive it or not BW made even worst choices like allowing us to give everyone over to the reapers via sythisis and let them win or outright control them which in itself is a load of crap and a new can of worms at the same time. I think we should've been able to either pick which side we wanted to be on in ME2, have it be a lie and we were in a reaper ship for most of the game thinking we where working for Cerberus, or do what others have suggested we sideline both groups for working with Liara who brings you back to life and with her being the SB we take out the threat as Me2 was a very irrelivent game in the series so much so they wrote out nearly 97% of the game itself by 3.

Breathe, man, breathe.

[Sriep]

Its not that I don't like Cerberus, its just that there is too much Cerberus. Mass Effect is a space opera with numerous technolgical alian specis with an alian menace destroying galitic civilization. So why are about half the ME3 missions agaisnt a human organisation that has basically the same objective as Shephard?

 

A galixy full of alians and all we get are Repers, Geth and Cerberus. Well Repers ok as they are the main badies, and Geth only apear in a few loclised missions. But could not some of the Cerberus misssions be replaced by sometihng else, Krogan rebellion or something.