96 réponses à ce sujet

[Farangbaa]

What I meant by delightful is that they all have considerable drawbacks.

[KaiserShep]

Drawbacks are fine, so long as there's a logical explanation for them. If they seem arbitrary, it's harder to take them seriously. It's like deciding to erase all the data on your computer, and as a result, your family blinks out of existence. Why the frak is this happening?

[Farangbaa]

Drawbacks are fine, so long as there's a logical explanation for them. If they seem arbitrary, it's harder to take them seriously. It's like deciding to erase all the data on your computer, and as a result, your family blinks out of existence. Why the frak is this happening?

Are you talking about destroy here? Because destroy has a fairly logical and simple to understand drawback: the Reapers are synthetics, the Crucible kills all synthetics, all synthetics die.

[KaiserShep]

I can't say that this is remotely sufficient. What's the difference between a synthetic and the Normandy, or the quarians' envirosuits? Much of my enjoyment is derived from turning my brain off at key moments. At the very least, synthesis is the worst offender.

[Farangbaa]

The Normandy's inanimate, a synthetic is not, a Quarian's envirosuit is inanimate too.

[IntoTheDarkness]

Putting Shepard into messiah mode isn't something that anyone much was impressed with but making a character powerless isn't any better. There should be moments of that and they need to be managed very carefully so that they feel like they flow naturally from the story, ideally so that the player is left thinking "If only I've done something differently". For an RPG decisions really have to be around issues that the player character can reasonably be expected to have some influence in and not just getting steamrollered over by events (play a straightforward shooter for that).

 

 Shepard won't be 'powerless' just because the game throws in some hard decisions. Shepard does not have only 'some influence' in the game, but he determines the outcome in most cases because we know that his decision will be a final say on what's going to happen. Geralt is still a hero and a very powerful, influential individual in The Witcher series in which decisions are tough, realistic, and morally ambiguous.

 

In the Witcher 2, the outcome of events are not only influenced by your decision but actions of other rival and friend characters as well(*); and that is what's needed in ME; the reapers should act much more vicious and corner Shepard in every turn instead of being a space jellyfish that doesn't do anything other than attacking planets in background. The reapers should conspire and turn allied factions from one another using indoctrination at every possible chance. In other words, Shepard should have less control on outcome because his enemies should act smarter, not because he is going to be 'powerless.'

 

In Landsmeet of DA:O, You shouldn't just decide who gets to be the king. Instead, you should have some say in the matter(with a vote) and your decisions and words should swing other voter's votes, with a lot of uncertainty and unpredictability. (some voters can turn on you, your decisions could sway/not sway some voters, etc). However, in the end, even if you lose the landmeet, you get to pick the king in DA:O. That is what I mean by Bioware's powertrip that the game is full of, and that is extrmeely arbitrary, more so than the ending of ME3, I might add. It's even more frustrating when you consider that Landsmeet is one of few instances in Bioware games that you have less control and the outcome is unpredictable; but ultimately you dictate the outcome easily, none the less. Duh.

 

 

 

*(the Withcer 2 spoiler)for instance, Letho turning on the Iorveth while Roche decides to ambush Iorveth-what Geralt does have impact on the outcome, but it gets altered in unexpectable way by other character's motives and actions

[GimmeDaGun]

 Shepard won't be 'powerless' just because the game throws in some hard decisions. Shepard does not have only 'some influence' in the game, but he determines the outcome in most cases because we know that his decision will be a final say on what's going to happen. Geralt is still a hero and a very powerful, influential individual in The Witcher series in which decisions are tough, realistic, and morally ambiguous.

 

In the Witcher 2, the outcome of events are not only influenced by your decision but actions of other rival and friend characters as well(*); and that is what's needed in ME; the reapers should act much more vicious and corner Shepard in every turn instead of being a space jellyfish that doesn't do anything other than attacking planets in background. The reapers should conspire and turn allied factions from one another using indoctrination at every possible chance. In other words, Shepard should have less control on outcome because his enemies should act smarter, not because he is going to be 'powerless.'

 

In Landsmeet of DA:O, You shouldn't just decide who gets to be the king. Instead, you should have some say in the matter(with a vote) and your decisions and words should swing other voter's votes, with a lot of uncertainty and unpredictability. (some voters can turn on you, your decisions could sway/not sway some voters, etc). However, in the end, even if you lose the landmeet, you get to pick the king in DA:O. That is what I mean by Bioware's powertrip that the game is full of, and that is extrmeely arbitrary, more so than the ending of ME3, I might add. It's even more frustrating when you consider that Landsmeet is one of few instances in Bioware games that you have less control and the outcome is unpredictable; but ultimately you dictate the outcome easily, none the less. Duh.

 

 

 

*(the Withcer 2 spoiler)for instance, Letho turning on the Iorveth while Roche decides to ambush Iorveth-what Geralt does have impact on the outcome, but it gets altered in unexpectable way by other character's motives and actions

 

You hit the nail on its head. 

 

As I said earlier. Shepard is not only a protagonist in the story, but the director of all events. He is not part of a greater thing, but the epicentre of all things happening in the trilogy. The best example for this is that it's him/her who decides whether the Council dies or lives. I mean come on. You are just one commander (of a special tactics and reconnaisance ship) while the human fleet's greatest and most decorated admiral is leading the charge... and yet it's still you who give the orders... wtf. Hackett is the real hero of the Battle of The Citadel and not Shepard. Yeah Shep might be some hero and as such respected and influential to a certain degree, but he should not be the guy at the helm when it comes to greater things. Shep could be a lot more interesting as a character if he had limits and faults and would not be the celebrity he is, but he behaves like some demi-god or puppet master instead and makes all the decisions.  

 

Just another example: you decide whether to save or not the Krogan (a whole race, a whole damn race hated by almost all). YOU...alone... you not only influence the things that happen, but its you who do it all and nobody has a say in that. The Salarians should have sent commandos to Tuchanka or they shoud have tipped off Cerberus or whatever. They hate the Krogan and they have a very good reason to do that. But you just do it anyway and the only thing you get as a backlash is that the Salarian politicians go butthurt and decide not help you anymore. And the trilogy is full of these type of events.

 

The Witcher (1&2) managed to create an influential, interesting protagonist who can make choices (sometimes hard ones, sometimes morally ambiguous ones, sometimes more simple ones which all challenge you as a player), but you are never told by the game that you did the good or bad thing. Also this protagonist is not the epicentre of events or the plot. He takes the role of the protagonist in the plot and nothing more. The decisions never go beyond the scope of his role in the plot, but of course they might have bigger consequences (not under your control). He can influence events (very much so) but he never makes the big decisions. Your decisions have consequences but its hardly you who shape the events yourself. Your decisions and deeds are just like a small rock in the mountains... they might start an avalanche, or they might not: but its not you who control them. The world and characters of TW games are more dynamic, organic and would exist without Geralt and his influence. It's story telling is much more like as in a novel and not so much like in an action hero flick where everything and everyone revolves around the protagonist. 

[Farangbaa]

I like you guys/gals.

[Reorte]

Shepard won't be 'powerless' just because the game throws in some hard decisions. Shepard does not have only 'some influence' in the game, but he determines the outcome in most cases because we know that his decision will be a final say on what's going to happen. Geralt is still a hero and a very powerful, influential individual in The Witcher series in which decisions are tough, realistic, and morally ambiguous.

I mostly agree, although not entirely on the "tough, realistic, and morally ambiguous" part since I think that gets over-emphasised by some people to the degree where it's not realistic either. Some people give the impression that they want the whole thing to be a continual grind of morally ambiguous decisions where something's going to hell no matter what you do. That's no more realistic than every choice being a straightforward good or bad.

The (unquoted) points you made about influencing rather than outright determining a lot of the time are ones I definitely agree with. There are cases where someone in Shepard's position (i.e. the person who's in command of the Normandy and hence the mission) should be the one making the outright decision, e.g. Virmire, but to say that Mass Effect goes overboard on that is putting it mildly.

[Reorte]

The Normandy's inanimate, a synthetic is not, nor is a quarian's envirosuit.

So what? If geth can upload themelves to quarian envirosuits and still get hit but suits without geth don't then the beam is somehow discriminating based on the software present, which doesn't make a great deal of sense. It would have to analyse all the software on all sufficiently complicated hardware and determine what it does. That's about as far-fetched as Synthesis.

[Farangbaa]

So what? If geth can upload themelves to quarian envirosuits and still get hit but suits without geth don't then the beam is somehow discriminating based on the software present, which doesn't make a great deal of sense. It would have to analyse all the software on all sufficiently complicated hardware and determine what it does. That's about as far-fetched as Synthesis.

Which is just as far-fetched as a beam all across the Galaxy to replace the Catalyst, housed at the Citadel.

Why are we still talking about the Crucible as if it's a real life thing? The game tells you it kills synthetics, that's it.

edit: I see I totally screwed up my English in the post you quoted That's what I get for not paying attention while I type

[Vazgen]

So what? If geth can upload themelves to quarian envirosuits and still get hit but suits without geth don't then the beam is somehow discriminating based on the software present, which doesn't make a great deal of sense. It would have to analyse all the software on all sufficiently complicated hardware and determine what it does. That's about as far-fetched as Synthesis.

The technology we know for sure is destroyed is based on Reaper tech - upgraded geth and EDI. Other than that we only have Catalyst's words for "the beam will destroy all the synthetics" which, I agree, doesn't make sense.

[Dabrikishaw]

I've done everything in the game besides the Tali, Garrus, Thane,  Jacob, Samara, and Diana Allers romances.

[GimmeDaGun]

The technology we know for sure is destroyed is based on Reaper tech - upgraded geth and EDI. Other than that we only have Catalyst's words for "the beam will destroy all the synthetics" which, I agree, doesn't make sense.

 

OFF:

As far as I remember it goes like this:

 

high EMS destroy - The dark energy/mass effect/whatever beam destroys/heavily damages everything that contains reaper technology and AI code: reapers, husks, relays, EDI, Geth, Citadel - happy ending (kind of: the galactic civilization can function again in no time). So actually it does destroy all synthetics (AI based, non-organic, non-living life forms enteties).

 

mid EMS destroy - The beam has side effects/is not that precise due to some damage and its less refined build: it hits much of the high-technology created out there: reaper tech + ship cores, weapons, cars, whatever - (less happy since the galaxy would have a hard time to catch up)

 

low EMS destroy - Since the Crucible is not that refined and also heavily damaged the whole thing goes sideways: the beam becomes a high energy impulse which burns basically everything in its way. (Total annihilation - sad, bad but intriguing ending - The galaxy experiences its Apocalypse and flies back to the stone age). 

 

Control - Fuses Shepard's consciounce with the reaper AI/Intelligence/Catalyst. Shep becomes the new Intelligence. (Take it or leave it ending. Discuss.)

 

Synthesis - The dark energy/mass effect beam radiates Shep's bio-synthetic DNA to all living beings in the reach of a relay and fuses it with the organics' DNA and the synthetics' AI. (Pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo, perfect utopia, Brave New World/Matrix3 ending - the perfect solution to the problem, but is it? Go and discuss etc.)

 

Saying FU to the intelligence - War goes on. The fleets of the galactic civilization go toast, Earth falls and slowly but steadily the whole galaxy would be harvested. The Citadel gives birth to the human reaper. (An ending for those who belive that an undestroyable enemy can be destroyed by some cocky celebrity guy/gal's bravado and heroic efforts. Going against bombers with slingshots.)

[Fixers0]

Trying to make sense of the Crucible and it's fuctions is a vain task, don't even try. 

[GimmeDaGun]

Trying to make sense of the Crucible and it's fuctions is a vain task, don't even try. 

 

Well, it's not that hard. It's your typical sci-fi-fantasy gadget with its own pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo. Works perfectly in the ME universe, since the whole thing is built upon pseudo-scientific fantasy lore: genetically engineered human beings, AIs, dark matter and energy harnessed and used as magic (biotics), people brought back from death with the help of technology, nano-technology, subliminal brain-washing, space-jump, FTL traveling, sterilizing a whole race by genetic manipulation with the help of particle injection in the air etc. etc.. All sounds very far fetched, over the top and pseudo-scientific to me. Mass Effect = space magic, or your typical space-saga sci-fi. 

[AlanC9]

The Normandy's inanimate, a synthetic is not, a Quarian's envirosuit is inanimate too.

Well, yeah, that sort of vitalist mumbo-jumbo would fit in fine in the MEU, as GimmeDaGun points out. The problem is more that Bio didn't bother to set it up.

[Reorte]

Well, it's not that hard. It's your typical sci-fi-fantasy gadget with its own pseudo-scientific mumbo-jumbo. Works perfectly in the ME universe, since the whole thing is built upon pseudo-scientific fantasy lore: genetically engineered human beings, AIs, dark matter and energy harnessed and used as magic (biotics), people brought back from death with the help of technology, nano-technology, subliminal brain-washing, space-jump, FTL traveling, sterilizing a whole race by genetic manipulation with the help of particle injection in the air etc. etc.. All sounds very far fetched, over the top and pseudo-scientific to me. Mass Effect = space magic, or your typical space-saga sci-fi.

There's mumbo-jumbo then there's mumbo-jumbo. Some of it doesn't mean I'll accept any of it. Roughly speaking if it's established early on as part of the universe setting then fine, if it means anything can happen whenever the author wants it to without him bothering to work out a rational in-universe reason for it then not fine.

[Han Shot First]

I think Bioware goofed in having the consequences of Shepard's end game decision radically alter the galaxy in different ways. It is nearly impossible to craft a sequel while accounting for all the different potential end states. That isn't to say that there shouldn't have been some choice and consequence in the end run, just that the choices and consequences should have been more focused on Shepard's team than the galaxy at large. Rather than having Shepard's decisions affect whether or not the Geth are destroyed or whether all life becomes partially synthetic, the choices should have had an impact on who lives and dies on the squad. It is much easier to craft a sequel from a game where say Liara or Garrus can be potentially dead, than one where an entire faction is removed in some imports and not in others.

 

Galaxy-affecting decisions should be much smaller in scale and similar to how Dragon Age: Origins handled world-changing decisions. In DA:O the player chooses who sits the throne in Orzammar for example, and that choice takes the kingdom in different directions, but it doesn't end with the dwarves extinct. Going forward into sequels, the DA devs were not hamstrung by having to worry about whether or not the dwarves continue to exist in all imports. The Rannoch solution should have decided the fate of the planet, not the factions. Choose the Geth and the Quarians remain homeless migrants. Choose the Quarians and the Geth are evicted from Rannoch but continue to exist on other worlds and in space stations. Going forward into a sequel, the devs then don't have to worry about factions having determinant fates, and the Rannoch decision can be easily referenced through dialogue, codex entries, and news stories. You also don't necessarily need to visit Rannoch ever again, so they wouldn't have to worry about creating three different versions of the same hub for different imports.

[AlanC9]

I think Bioware goofed in having the consequences of Shepard's end game decision radically alter the galaxy in different ways. It is nearly impossible to craft a sequel while accounting for all the different potential end states.

This is only a conceptual problem if you intend to support all those end states in a sequel in the first place, of course.

KotOR 2 would have been better if they'd just picked LS or DS Revan for the sequel.

[GimmeDaGun]

There's mumbo-jumbo then there's mumbo-jumbo. Some of it doesn't mean I'll accept any of it. Roughly speaking if it's established early on as part of the universe setting then fine, if it means anything can happen whenever the author wants it to without him bothering to work out a rational in-universe reason for it then not fine.

 

Well yeah. I hear you, but it is how it is. The ME universe was building up as the trilogy progressed, introducing new elements throughout the whole saga. Some of the lore associated things were introduced in the middle of the game, some of them in the last chapter of the trilogy. Most of the times they used some of the existing lore to introduce new things, building up on the foundations of the established things. Most noteable examples for this are the Crucible, the Leviathan, Cerberus, the Shroud etc. etc.. Some of them worked and fitted better, some of them did not work that well. The Crucible itself was one of these late-comers. It fits the lore (a Mass Effect energy device designed by some ancient race - Leviathans being the primary suspect - with the purpose of destroying or harnessing the reapers), but it is very apperant that they did not have a clue how to resolve the core conflic of the plot (reaper threat that is) so they came up with this "deus ex machina" tool later in the writing process to make things less complicated. It worked but it was somewhat contrived and far fetched.

 

Problem is that the script writers wrote themselves into the corner with the whole reaper invasion story: creating and building up basically an invincible force that threats the galaxy which can not be defeated by conventional means. It shows that they never really planned out the overarching plot (just take a look at the second chapter of the saga: ME2 - it's more like a filler or spin off than a real part of the trilogy). They were writing the whole thing as they were going. The changes in the writing team did not help too much either. ME is not the most refined and intricate story written out there, but at least it is entertaining enough. 

 

The Witcher games have better writing overall - I'm not saying that the ME games have bad writing - but CDPR was luckier since they already had an existing universe, lore and characters they could work with. Sapkowski's books were a great source material that they could use as a reference for their writing. Certainly it is more limited but gave an opportunity for more consistent writing for the script writers. The ME team created their own universe from scratch which is a very hard thing to do, especially that those guys are not authors (writers of books), no matter how talented they are. Writing a book takes years of work and demands real writing talent (vein if you like) while a game's script writers do not have the luxury of time and total creative freedom (they are bound by the limitations of the medium and corporate interest). So it's unfair to compare the two. Yet I still say that planning, peer-reviewing and paying attention to consistency and logical flow is very important. They could have been a bit more ambitious in this regard (also). CDPR's writing team took an already existing source material, lore and story as a foundation for their story, which itself was their own baby. They came up with their own story building upon the books but the story they wrote is more thought out, more ambitious , more intricate and overall better than ME's. The choices and consequences are all treated better also. Each permutation and consequence is well thought out and better elaborated. So yeah. 

[Farangbaa]

ME2 is a glorified Dr. Phil simulator.

[SporkFu]

ME2 is a glorified Dr. Phil simulator.

"Which one of these deadbeats is the father of Kelly Chambers' baby? Tune in NEXT to find out!" 

 

Oh God, what a f***ing nightmare. 

[Reorte]

The ME team created their own universe from scratch which is a very hard thing, especially that those guys are not authers (writers of books), no matter how talented they are.

It's a good point. The ME team managed to create a universe I really love though. IMO it means get the right people for the right jobs - they certainly got the right people for universe creation although they could've done with a few others for ironing out some of the details. Then maybe you need other people to do the actual writing, and it's even possible to have multiple people working on that, each with their different strengths - some people better at the overal plot and structure, others good with writing characters and dialogue and so on. Play to peoples' strengths.

[sH0tgUn jUliA]

ME2 has another episode: "Normandy crew members infected with the scale itch? Find out how after these messages!"